■hi  ■:■.'•*  ', 


M 


i'li';' - 

■■&!^'^!^<^f:^■■\•■r  ■ 


,*«« »'  * 


PRINCETON,  N.  J.  ^'' 


'?/ 


DJyision      Xv  n-' .<C.  3  O  O 
Section        vSv~X^l3 


5/;.-// 


Number 


iSBo 


THE     LIVING     CHRIST 


THE    FOUR   GOSPELS. 


WORKS     3Y    THE     SAME     AUTHOR. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians:  Its  Doctrine  and  Ethics. 

Fourth  Edition.  Crown  Zvo,  cloth,       7/6 

Impressions  of  Australia.  Croivn  ^vo,  cloth,       5/- 

Laws  of  Christ  for  Common  Life. 

Fifth  Thousand.  Crown  8z'o,  cloth,       6/- 

Nine  Lectures  on  Preaching. 

Fifih  Edition.  Crown  Svo,  cloth,       6/- 

The  Jewish  Temple  and  the  Christian  Church. 
Discourses  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
Eighth  Edition.  Crown  Svo,  cloth,       6/- 

The  New  Evangelicalism  and  the  Old. 

Crown  Svo,  cloth,        1/- 

Week-day  Sermons. 

Fifth  Edition.  Crotvn  Svo,  cloth,       3/6 

The  Ten  Commandments. 

Fifth  Edition.  Crozvn  Svo,  cloth,       5/- 

London:  HODDER  A\D  STOUGIITON,  27,  Paternoster  Row. 


THE     LIVING     CHRIST 


AND 


THE    FOUR    GOSPELS. 


BY 

R.    W.    DALE,    LL.D., 

BIRMINGHAM. 


SECOND  EDITION.      FOURTH  THOUSAND. 


ITonbon : 

HODDER     AND     STOUGHTON, 

J7,    PATERNOSTER    ROW. 


Butler  &  Tanner, 

The  Selwood  Printing  Works, 

Frome,  and  London. 


PREFACE. 

I  ^HE  Lectures  printed  in  this  volume  were 
-■-  delivered  to  the  Carrs  Lane  congregation, 
at  irregular  intervals,  during  the  winter  and 
eariy  summer  of  the  present  year  ;  the  five  first 
and  the  last  on  Sunday  mornings,  and  the  rest 
at  the  usual  Thursday  evening  service. 

For  whom  were  they  intended  ? 

Eleven  or  twelve  years  ago  I  was  preach- 
ing at  Augustine  Church,  Edinburgh,  a  few 
months  after  Dr.  Lindsay  Alexander,  a  scholar 
and  theologian  of  distinction,  had  resigned  the 
pastorate.  As  I  walked  home  with  one  of  the 
deacons  after  the  morning's  service,  he  said 
some  very  gracious  things,  which  I  have  un- 
happily forgotten,  about  the  sermon  ;  he  also 
said  some  things,  not  so  gracious,  about  the 
ministers  who  had  served  the  Church  since  Dr. 


viii  Preface, 

Alexander's  resignation  ;  these,  owing  to  some 
unamiable  intellectual  peculiarity,  I  remember. 
"Sir,"  he  said,  "they  have  preached  to  us  as  if 
we  were  all  Masters  of  Arts."  That  was  an 
error  which  I  was  not  capable  of  committing, 
and  therefore  I  deserved  no  credit  for  avoiding 
it.  For  if  a  preacher  does  something  to  form  » 
the  habits  of  his  people,  the  people  do  almost 
as  much  to  form  the  habits  of  the  preacher ; 
and  for  thirty-seven  years  I  have  been  the 
minister  of  a  concrrecjation  in  the  heart  of  a 
great  manufacturing  community — a  congrega- 
tion in  which  there  are  never  many  Masters 
of  Arts,  although  there  are  in  it  many  men  and 
women  with  an  active,  vigorous,  and  specula- 
tive intellect,  and  with  a  keen  interest  in  public 
affairs  and  in  current  theological  controversies. 
For  such  persons  the  Lectures  were  prepared, 
and  they  are  published  with  the  hope  that  they 
may  be  of  service  to  persons  of  the  same 
description  in  other  parts  of  England. 

In    delivering    the    Lectures    to    a    popular 
audience,  it  was  necessary  to  repeat  in  several 


Preface.  ix 

of  the  later  Lectures  some  thinofs  which  had 
been  said  in  the  earHer.  These  repetitions  are 
unnecessary  in  a  printed  book,  but  I  have  not 
found  it  possible  to  cancel  them  without  recon- 
structing the  whole  argument. 

To  those  of  my  readers  who  may  wish  to 
see  the  question  of  the  historical  trustworthi- 
ness of  the  Four  Gospels  treated  with  greater 
fulness,  I  recommend  Professor  Salmon's  In- 
trodziction  to  the  Nezo  Testament,  Dr.  West- 
cott's  History  of  the  New  Testament  Canon, 
Dr.  Lightfoot's  Essays  on  the  Work  entitled 
"  Supernatural  Religion^'  Dr.  Wace's  The 
Gospel  and  its  Witnesses,  Professor  Sanday's 
The  Gospels  in  the  Second  Centnry,  and  The 
Grounds  of  Theistic  and  Christian  Belief,  by 
my  friend  Dr.  Fisher,  of  Yale  (U.S.),  to  all 
of  which  books  I  gratefully  acknowledge  my 
own  obligations. 

R.  W.  DALE. 

Llanbedr, 
Atigust,  1890. 


CONTENTS. 


LECTURE    I.  'AGE 

The  Argument  from  Experience  .        ,       .        i 

LECTURE    IL 

The  Validity  of  the  Argument  from  Expe- 
rience  24 

LECTURE   IIL 

The  Direct  Appeal  of  Christ  to  the   Spirit  of 

Man 42 

LECTURE    IV. 
Reply  to  Criticisms  on  the  Preceding  Lectures      62 

LECTURE  V. 

The  Historical  Trustworthiness  of  the  Story 
Contained  in  the  Four  Gospels  :  how  should 
THE  Evidence  be  Approached?  ...        .82 

LECTURE   VL 
EUSEBIUS  -  .      104 

LECTURE  VIL 
Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Tertullian       .       .1x7 


xii  Contents. 

LECTURE  VIII.  PAGE 

IREN/EUS 136 

LECTURE    IX. 
Tatian IS3 

LECTURE   X. 
Justin  Martyr i75 

LECTURE   XI. 
Marcion 202 

LECTURE   XII. 
Papias 221 

LECTURE   XIII. 

POLYCARP 246 

LECTURE   XIV. 
Review  of  the  Argument   ......    269 

APPENDIX 295 


LECTURE    I. 
THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE 

I. 

THERE  are  large  numbers  of  people  who  sup- 
pose that  modern  Science  and  modern  Criticism 
have  destroyed  the  foundations  of  Faith,  and  who 
cannot  understand  how  it  is  possible,  in  these  days, 
for  intelligent,  open-minded,  educated  men  to  believe 
in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

It  may  perhaps  be  well  for  us  to  remember  that 
more  than  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago  there  were 
large  numbers  of  people  of  precisely  the  same  mind. 
They  believed  that,  as  the  result  of  the  great  changes 
which  had  passed  upon  the  intellectual  life  of  Europe 
since  the  Revival  of  Learning,  the  Christian  Faith 
was  no  longer  credible,  and  that  its  power  was  finally 
broken.  Butler,  in  the  preface  to  his  Analogy,  pub- 
lished in  1736,  says  :  "  It  is  come,  I  know  not  how, 
to  be  taken  for  granted  by  many  persons  that  Chris- 
tianity is  not  so  much  as  a  subject  of  inquiry,  but  that 
it  is  now  at  length  discovered  to  be  fictitious.  And 
accordingly   they  treat  it  as  if,   in  the  present  age, 

L.  c.  I 


2  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

this  were  an  agreed  point  among  all  people  of  dis- 
cernment, and  nothing  remained,  but  to  set  it  up 
as  a  principal  subject  of  mirth  and  ridicule,  as  it 
were  by  way  of  reprisals,  for  its  having  so  long  in- 
terrupted the  pleasures  of  the  world." 

Throughout  the  seventeenth  century  an  under- 
current of  unbelief  had  been  rapidly  gathering 
strength  in  France,  in  Holland,  in  Germany,  and  in 
England.  To  check  it  Grotius  had  written  his  De 
Veritate  Religionis  Chn'stiancs,  Pascal  had  projected 
the  great  work,  the  fragments  of  which  are  preserved 
in  his  Peusces,  and  Richard  J^axter,  ^^•ho,  I  think,  was 
the  earliest  English  writer  on  the  "  Evidences,"  had 
written  his  Unreasonableness  of  Infidelity,  his  Reasons 
for  the  Christian  Religion,  and  his  More  Reasons  for 
the  Christian  Religion,  and  no  Reason  against  it. 
Towards  the  end  of  the  century  the  hostile  move- 
ment became  so  formidable,  that  Robert  Boyle 
founded  his  famous  lectureship  for  the  maintenance 
and  defence  of  the  Faith  against  unbelief  The  first 
of  the  lecturers  was  Richard  Bentley,  who,  in  1692, 
discoursed  on  The  folly  of  Atheism  and  li'hat  is 
now  called  Deism,  even  with  Respeet  to  the  Present 
Life — not  a  promising  argument  with  which  to  meet 
those  who  contested  the  supernatural  origin  of  the 
Christian  revelation.  He  was  followed,  year  after 
year,  by  a  succession  of  men,  eminent  in  their 
time,  and  some  of  whom  had  extensive  learning  and 
great  intellectual  force ;  but  the  sentences  which  I 
have  quoted  from  Butler  show  that,  after  the  Boyle 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 


lecturers  had  been  lecturing  for  more  than  forty 
)-cars,  the  assailants  of  the  Christian  Faith  claimed 
the  victor}'.  The  confidence  of  unbelief  was  as  high 
when  Butler  wrote  in  the  early  part  of  the  ciglitccnth 
century  as  it  is  now  at  the  end  of  the  nineteenth. 

Then  came  a  great  change ;  and  within  sixty  years 
the  writings  and  the  very  names  of  the  English  deists 
were  almost  forgotten  ;  the  ponderous  folios  in  which 
the  first  generation  of  Boyle  lecturers  lay  entombed 
in  public  libraries  were  rarely  disturbed,  and  were 
covered  with  dust ;  ^  and  the  fires  of  a  great  religious 
revival  were  burning  gloriously  in  every  part  of  the 
country.     Faith  was  triumphant. 

Now  again,  as  in  Butler's  time,  "  it  is  come,  I  know 
not  how,  to  be  taken  for  granted  by  many  persons 
that  Christianity  is  not  so  much  as  a  subject  of 
inquiry."  The  temper  with  which  all  but  the  coarsest 
and  least  cultivated  of  those  who  reject  the  Christian 
Faith  regard  it  is  happily  very  different  from  what 
it  was  in  the  last  century.  They  do  not  "set  it  up 
as  a  principal  subject  of  mirth  and   ridicule  "  ;  they 

'  "We  too  have  had  writers  of  that  description,  who  made 
sonic  noise  in  their  day.  At  present  tbe>'  repose  in  lasting 
obhvion.  Who,  born  within  the  last  forty  years,  has  read  one 
word  of  Collins,  and  Toland,  and  Tindal,  and  Ciuibb,  and 
Morgan,  and  that  whole  race  who  called  themselves  free- 
thinkers ?  Who  now  reads  Bolingbroke  ?  Who  ever  read  him 
through  ?  Ask  the  booksellers  of  London  what  is  become  of  all 
these  lights  of  the  world.  In  a  few  years  their  few  successors 
will  go  to  the  family  vault  of  'all  the  Capulets.'" — BURKE  : 
RcJlcctioHS  on  the  Revolution  in  France.     [1790.] 


THE    ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPEIUENCE. 


speak  with  respect,  sometimes  with  pathetic  regret, 
of  the  vanished  ilkisions  which  once  consoled  the 
sorrows  and  sustained  the  courage,  the  hope,  and  the 
virtue  of  mankind  ;  but  still  they  take  it  for  granted 
that,  "  among  all  people  of  discernment " — or,  to 
use  the  current  phrases,  among  all  cultivated  men 
who  are  familiar  with  the  best  and  most  advanced 
thought  of  our  time — Christianity,  as  a  religion  claim- 
ing to  have  originated  in  Divine  revelation,  is  a  lost 
cause. 

Their  confidence  is  not,  I  think,  as  firm  as  it  was 
ten  or  fifteen  years  ago  ;  for  they  are  beginning  to 
discover  that  renewed  and  prolonged  assaults  on  the 
Christian  Faith — assaults  from  various  quarters  and 
sustained  with  great  intellectual  vigour  and  with  all 
the  resources  both  of  the  older  learning  and  of  the 
new  sciences — have  produced  very  little  effect. 

Fifty  years  ago,  the  discoveries  of  geology  were 
supposed  to  be  fatal  to  the  inspiration  of  Moses  ;  and 
it  was  contended  that,  if  fatal  to  the  inspiration  of 
Moses,  they  must  also  be  fatal  to  the  claims  of  Christ 
as  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  man,  the  Lord  and  the 
Saviour  of  the  human  race.  The  assailants  of  the 
Faith  were  sure  that  at  last  they  were  about  to  be 
victorious;  among  its  defenders  there  was  anxiety, 
anger,  alarm.  Ingenious  theories  were  invented, 
illustrating  the  harmony  between  Genesis  and  geo- 
logy ;  but  plain  men  felt  instinctively  that  they  were 
very  much  too  ingenious  to  be  satisfactory.  Since 
that  time,  Christian  scholars  have  given  themselves 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  5 

more  seriously  than  before  to  the  scientific  investiga- 
tion of  the  Hterature  of  ancient  races  ;  and  they  are 
coming  to  the  conclusion  that,  when  the  true  nature 
of  the  earlier  books  of  the  Old  Testament  is  under- 
stood, the  objections  to  their  authority  suggested  b}' 
the  discoveries  of  modern  science  cease  to  be  relevant. 
Meanwhile  ordinary  Christian  people,  who  know  very 
little  about  investigations  of  this  kind,  have  frankly 
accepted  all  that  the  geologists  have  ascertained  in 
relation  to  the  antiquity  of  the  earth  and  the  antiquity 
of  man  ;  but  their  faith  in  Christ  is  undisturbed. 

More  recently,  the  conclusions  of  Mr.  Darwin  con- 
cerning the  origin  of  species,  and  especially  concern- 
ing the  origin  of  man,  created  similar  excitement. 
At  first,  and  when  the  boldness  and  grandeur  of  his 
theories  were  very  imperfectly  apprehended,  they 
provoked  more  resentment  than  apprehension  ;  for 
they  seemed  to  impeach  the  dignity  of  human  nature. 
But  the  geological  controversies  had  helped  to  dis- 
cipline thoughtful  Christian  men  to  a  new  conception 
of  the  nature  of  Divine  revelation  and  of  the  literature 
in  which  the  revelation  is  preserved.  As  soon  as  it 
became  apparent  that  the  general  conclusions  of  Mr. 
Darwin  were  sustained  by  the  almost  universal  con- 
currence of  the  highest  scientific  opinion  in  Europe 
and  America,  most  Christian  people  accepted  them 
without  hesitation  —  but  with  one  necessary  and 
reasonable  reservation.  It  lies  within  the  scope  of 
the  physical  sciences  to  investigate  the  origin  and 
history   of  the   physical    organization    of  man  ;   but 


6  THE  ARGUMENT    FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

their  resources  and  methods  arc  at  fault  when  they 
attempt  to  investigate  the  origin  and  history  of  his 
ethical  and  spiritual  life.  By  no  process  of  develop- 
ment is  the  transition  from  mere  necessity  to  freedom 
conceivable.  The  region  of  moral  freedom,  and  of 
religious  faith  and  hope,  lies  beyond  the  boundaries 
of  the  sciences  that  deal  with  a  world  of  phenomena 
governed  by  fixed  and  unvarying  laws.  These  dis- 
tinctions however  remain  unknown  to  the  immense 
majority  of  Christian  people.  They  are  assured  that 
the  highest  scientific  authorities  are  practically  agreed 
in  accepting  the  great  outlines  of  Mr.  Darwin's  theory 
of  the  origin  of  species,  and  they  are  also  assured 
that  this  theory  is  irreconcilable  with  the  Jewish  and 
Christian  Scriptures.  Through  popular  magazines, 
through  newspapers,  through  a  thousand  channels, 
they  are  informed  that  the  old  beliefs  concerning  the 
creation  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  concerning 
the  creation  of  man  and  the  fall  of  man,  arc  finally 
destroyed  :  but  they  still  rely  on  Christ  with  their 
old  confidence  for  the  remission  of  sins  ;  they  still 
make  Ilis  will  the  law  of  conduct;  they  still  pray  to 
Him  for  consolation  in  sorrow,  for  defence  against 
temptation,  and  for  strength  in  duty  ;  and  they  still 
hope,  through  Him,  for  a  glorious  immortality. 
They  are  sure  that  the  foundations  on  which  their 
faith  is  built  are  firm  and  unshaken. 

Assaults  of  another  kind  have  been  made  on  the 
traditional  Christian  beliefs  during  the  last  fifty  j'ears. 
Attacks  on  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the  Four 


THE  ARGUMENT  EROM  EXPERIENCE.  7 

Gospels  have  taken  a  new  form  ;  and  the  theories  of 
their  origin  maintained  by  Strauss  and  by  Ferdinand 
Baur  have  been  discussed  with  great  vigour  all  over 
Europe.  The  learning  and  the  industry  and  the 
splendid  intellectual  vigour  of  Baur  have  produced  a 
great  impression  on  theological  scholars  ;  but,  if  I  may 
trust  my  own  observation,  neither  the  speculations 
of  Strauss  on  the  origin  of  the  story  of  Christ,  nor  of 
Baur  on  the  origin  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment have  produced  the  general  alarm  that  was 
created  for  a  time  by  the  discoveries  of  geology 
and  their  alleged  conflict  with  the  early  chapters  of 
Genesis,  or  by  the  theories  of  Mr.  Darwin  and  their 
alleged  conflict  with  the  Christian  conception  of  the 
origin  and  destiny  of  man.  Forty  or  fifty  years  ago 
ordinary  Christian  people  heard  that  an  eminent 
German  theologian  had  written  a  great  book  to  show 
that  the  story  of  Christ  in  the  New  Testament  was  as 
mythical  as  the  story  of  Hercules  ;  that  the  book  had 
produced  immense  excitement  in  German}-,  France, 
and  Holland  ;  and  that  it  had  been  translated  into 
several  European  languages.  They  listened  with 
astonishment,  many  of  them  with  a  certain  scornful 
amusement ;  but  very  few  of  them  felt  that  this 
assault  on  the  Christian  Faith  v>as  at  all  formidable. 
Some  years  later  they  heard  that  another  eminent 
German  theologian  was  maintaining  that  most  of  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament  were  written  in  the 
second  century,  in  the  interests  of  conflicting  parties 
in    the    Church,   or   to  bring   about   a   reconciliation 


8  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

between  them ;  that  they  were  the  productions  of 
unknown  authors,  who,  to  add  to  the  authority  of 
their  writings,  had  attributed  them  to  Paul  and  Peter 
and  John  and  Luke  ;  that,  to  use  the  rough  language 
of  plain  men,  they  were  deliberate  forgeries.  Most 
Christian  people  listened  to  this  account  of  the 
Christian  Scriptures  with  indignation,  and  dismissed 
it  as  wholly  incredible.  It  did  not  disturb  their 
faith. 

Nor  has  modern  criticism  on  the  Jewish  Scriptures 
produced  any  general  and  enduring  anxiety.  The 
excitement  which  followed  the  appearance  of  the 
writings  of  Bishop  Colenso,  twenty  or  thirty  years 
ago,  soon  passed  over  ;  and  there  is  something  very 
remarkable  in  the  indifference  with  which  at  the 
present  time  the  majority  of  Christian  people  regard 
the  whole  critical  controversy  concerning  the  Old 
Testament. 

I  do  not  mean  that  these  successive  assaults  on 
traditional  Christian  beliefs — assaults  in  the  name 
of  Science,  assaults  in  the  name  of  Criticism — have 
had  no  disastrous  results.  There  are  many  persons 
who  are  convinced  that  the  ascertained  conclusions 
of  modern  Science  and  of  modern  Criticism  are 
destructive  of  the  authority  which  has  been  attri- 
buted both  to  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  Scrip- 
tures, that  the  traditional  opinions  concerning  the 
authorship  and  the  dates  of  many  of  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  arc  false  ;  and  that  most  of  the 
writings  contained  in  the  New  Testament  arc  .spu- 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE,  9 

rious.  Or,  if  some  of  the  extreme  conclusions  of  the 
destructive  criticism  are  not  regarded  as  finally- 
established,  it  is  known  that  great  names  can  be 
quoted  for,  as  well  as  against,  them.  And  as  it  is 
assumed  that  the  Jewish  and  the  Christian  Scrip- 
tures are  the  foundations  of  Christian  faith,  that 
we  must  believe  in  the  genuineness  and  historical 
trustworthiness  of  these  ancient  books,  and  even 
in  their  inspiration,  before  we  can  believe  in  Christ, 
they  argue  that,  until  these  discussions  are  finally 
closed  in  favour  of  the  traditional  opinions,  faith 
in  Christ  is  impossible.  The  controversies  have 
not,  in  any  large  number  of  cases,  destroyed  faith 
wJicre  faith  already  existed ;  but  where  faith  does  not 
exist,  they  appear  to  very  many  persons  to  create  an 
insuperable  obstacle  to  faith. 

To  such  persons,  if  they  are  serious  and  well 
informed,  there  is  something  perplexing  in  the 
persistency  of  the  faith  of  the  great  majority  of 
Christian  believers.  Among  those  who  remain 
Christian  there  are  men  whose  intellectual  vigour, 
patience,  and  keenness  are  equal  to  their  own  ;  men 
who  are  their  equals  in  general  intellectual  culture, 
and  who  know  as  much  as  they  know  about  the 
currents  of  modern  thought ;  candid  men  ;  men  who 
are  incorruptible  in  their  loyalty  to  truth  ;  men  who 
have  a  due  sense  of  the  immense  importance,  in 
relation  to  the  higher  life  of  the  human  race,  of  the 
questions  at  issue  :  Hozv  is  it  that  the  faith  in  Christ 
of  siieh  men  is  nnshaken  ? 


10  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

This  is  the  precise  question  which  I  propose  to 
answer  in  the  earHer  lectures  of  the  course  which  I 
begin  this  morning.  It  is  not  my  primary  intention 
to  state  the  reasons  why  those  who  do  not  beheve  in 
Christ  should  believe  in  Him,  but  to  explain  zvJiy  it 
is  that  those  ivho  believe  in  Him  continue  to  believe. 
This  explanation  however  ought  to  show  that  those 
are  in  error  who  suppose  that  present  controversies 
on  the  authority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  make  a  firm 
and  settled  faith  in  Christ  impossible. 

n. 

The  substance  of  my  first  answer  to  the  question 
why  it  is  that  those  who  believe  in  Christ  continue 
to  believe,  may  be  given  in  a  single  sentence  :  What- 
ever may  have  been  the  original  grounds  of  their  faith, 
their  faith  has  been  verified  in  their  ozcn  personal 
experience. 

They  have  trusted  in  Christ  for  certain  great  and 
wonderful  things,  and  they  have  received  great  and 
wonderful  things.  They  have  not  perhaps  received 
precisely  what  they  expected  when  their  Christian 
life  began,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  cannot  be 
really  known  until  a  man  has  entered  into  it ;  but 
what  they  have  received  assures  them  that  Christ  is 
alive,  that  He  is  within  reach,  and  that  He  is  the 
Saviour  and  Lord  of  men. 

That  they  have  received  these  blessings  in  answer 
to  their  faith  in   Christ  is  a  matter  of  personal  con- 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 


sciousness.  They  know  it,  as  they  know  that  fire 
burns. 

Their  experience  varies.  Some  of  them  would 
say  that  they  can  recall  acts  of  Christ  in  which  His 
personal  volition  and  His  supernatural  power  were 
as  definitely  manifested  as  in  any  of  the  miracles 
recorded  in  the  Four  Gospels.  They  were  struggling 
unsuccessfully  with  some  evil  temper — with  envy, 
jealousy,  personal  ambition — and  could  not  subdue 
it.  They  hated  it ;  they  hated  themselves  for  being 
under  its  tyranny;  but  expel  it  they  could  not.  If 
it  seemed  suppressed  for  a  time,  it  returned  ;  and 
returned  with  its  malignant  power  increased  rather 
than  diminished.  They  scourged  themselves  with 
scorpions  for  yielding  to  it;  still  they  yielded.  In 
their  despair  they  appealed  to  Christ  ;  and  in  a 
moment  the  evil  fires  were  quenched,  and  they  were 
never  rekindled.  These  instantaneous  deliverances 
are  perhaps  exceptional  ;  but  to  those  who  can  recall 
them  they  carry  an  irresistible  conviction  that  the 
Living  Christ  has  heard  their  cry  and  answered 
them. 

The  more  ordinary  experiences  of  the  Christian  life, 
though  less  striking,  are  not  less  conclusive.  The 
proof  that  Christ  has  heard  prayer  is  not  always  con- 
centrated into  a  moment,  but  is  more  commonly 
spread  over  large  tracts  of  time.  Praj-er  is  offered 
for  an  increase  of  moral  strength  in  resisting  tempta- 
tion, or  for  the  disappearance  of  reluctance  in  the 
discharge  of  duties  which    are  distasteful,  or  for   a 


THE  ARGUMEXT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 


more  gracious  and  kindly  temper,  or  for  patience 
and  courage  in  bearing  trouble,  or  for  self-control, 
or  for  relief  from  exhausting  and  fruitless  anxiety  ; 
and  the  answer  comes.  It  comes  gradually,  but  still 
it  comes.  We  had  lost  hope.  It  seemed  as  if  all  our 
moral  vigour  was  dying  down,  and  as  if  nothing  could 
restore  it.  The  tide  was  slowly  ebbing,  and  we  were 
powerless  to  recall  the  retreating  waters  :  but  after 
we  prayed  it  ceased  to  ebb  ;  for  a  time  it  seemed 
stationary  ;  then  it  began  to  flow  ;  and  though  with 
many  of  us  it  has  never  reached  the  flood,  the 
wholesome  waters  have  renewed  the  energy  and  the 
joy  of  life. 
,  Or  we  prayed  to  Christ  to  liberate  us  from  some 

evil  habit.  The  chains  did  not  fall  away  at  His  touch, 
like  the  chains  of  Peter  at  the  touch  of  the  angel  ; 
but  in  some  mysterious  way  they  were  loosened,  and 
at  the  same  time  we  received  accessions  of  strength. 
The  old  habit  continued  to  trouble  us  ;  it  still  im- 
peded our  movements  :  but  we  could  move ;  we  reco- 
vered some  measure  of  freedom,  and  were  conscious 
that  we  were  slaves  no  longer.  There  still  remained 
a  mechanical  and  automatic  tendency  to  the  evil 
ways  of  thinking,  speaking,  or  acting  ;  but  we  had 
become  vigilant  and  alert,  and  were  prompt  to  resist 
the  tendency  as  soon  as  it  began  to  work  ;  and  we 
were  strong  enough  to  master  it.  In  the  course  of 
time  the  tendency  became  weaker  and  weaker,  and 
at  last,  in  some  cases,  it  almost  disappeared. 

Some  men  have  appealed  to  Christ  when  they  have 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  13 

been  seized  with  a  great  horror  through  the  discovery 
of  their  guilt.  It  was  not  the  awful  penalty  which 
menaces  the  impenitent  that  haunted  and  terrified 
them.  Nor  was  their  distress  occasioned  chiefly  by 
the  consciousness  of  moral  evil.  They  feared  the 
penalty,  and  they  were  humiliated  and  shamed  by 
the  contrast  between  ideal  goodness  and  their  own 
moral  and  spiritual  life  ;  but  what  stung  and  tortured 
them,  sunk  them  into  despair,  filled  heaven  and  earth 
with  a  darkness  that  could  be  felt,  and  made  life 
intolerable,  was  their  guilt — guilt  which  they  had 
incurred  by  their  past  sins,  and  which  they  continued 
to  incur  by  their  present  sinfulness. 

When  once  this  sense  of  guilt  fastens  itself  on  a 
man,  he  cannot  shake  it  off  at  will.  The  keen  agony 
may  gradually  pass  into  a  dull,  dead  pain  ;  and  after 
a  time,  the  sensibility  of  the  soul  may  seem  to  be 
wholly  lost  ;  but  a  man  can  never  be  sure  that  the 
horror  will  not  return. 

The  real  nature  of  this  experience  is  best  seen 
when  it  has  been  occasioned  by  the  grosser  and  more 
violent  forms  of  crime.  Men  who  have  committed 
murder,  for  example,  have  been  driven  almost  insane 
by  the  memory  of  their  evil  deed.  Their  agony  may 
have  had  nothing  in  it  of  the  nature  of  repentance  ; 
they  were  not  distressed  because  their  crime  had 
revealed  to  them  the  malignity  and  the  fierce  strength 
of  their  passions ;  they  had  no  desire  to  become 
gentle  and  kindly.  They  were  filled  with  horror  and 
remorse  by  their   awful  guilt.      They  felt   that  the 


14  rilK  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

crime  was  theirs,  and  would  alwaj'S  continue  to  be 
theirs  ;  that  it  would  be  theirs  if  it  remained  concealed 
as  truly  as  if  it  were  known  ;  indeed,  it  seemed  to  be 
in  some  terrible  way  more  truly  theirs  so  long  as  the 
secret  was  kept.  It  was  not  the  fear  of  punishment 
that  convulsed  them  ;  they  have  sometimes  brought 
on  themselves  public  indignation  and  abhorrence,  and 
have  condemned  themselves  to  the  gallows  by  con- 
fessing their  crime  in  order  to  obtain  relief  from  their 
agony. 

Suppose  that  a  man  possessed  by  this  great  horror 
discovered  that,  in  some  wonderful  way,  the  dark  and 
damning  stain  on  his  conscience  had  disappeared  ; 
that,  although  he  had  done  the  deed,  the  iron  chain 
which  bound  him  to  the  criminality  of  it  had  been 
broken ;  that  before  God  and  man  and  his  own 
conscience  he  was  free  from  the  gtiilt  of  it ; — the 
supposition,  in  its  completeness,  is  an  impossible  one ; 
but  if  it  were  possible,  the  discovery  would  lift  the 
man  out  of  the  darkness  of  hell   into  the  light  of 

/aven. 
But  to  large  numbers  of  Christian  men  a  discovery 
which  in  substance  is  identical  with  this  has  actually 
come  in  response  to  their  trust  in  Christ.  Nothing 
is  more  intensely  real  than  the  sense  of  guilt ;  it  is 
as  real  as  the  eternal  distinction  between  right  and 
wrong  in  which  it  is  rooted.  And  nothing  is  more 
intensely  real  than  the  sense  of  release  from  guilt 
which  comes  from  the  discovery  and  assurance  of  the 
remission  of  sins.     The  evil  things  which  a  man  has 


^ 


THE   ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  15 

done  cannot  be  undone  ;  but  when  they  have  been 
forgiven  through  Christ,  the  iron  chain  which  so 
bound  him  to  them  as  to  make  the  guilt  of  them 
eternally  his  has  been  broken  ;  before  God  and  his 
own  conscience  he  is  no  longer  guilty  of  them. 
This  is  the  Christian  mystery  of  justification,  which, 
according  to  Paul — and  his  words  have  been  con- 
firmed in  the  experience  of  millions  of  Christian  m.en 
— is  "  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one 
that  believeth."  It  changes  darkness  into  light ; 
despair  into  victorious  hope  ;  prostration  into  buoy- 
ancy and  vigour.  It  is  one  of  the  supreme  motives 
to  Christian  living,  and  it  makes  Christian  living 
possible.  The  m.an  who  has  received  this  great 
deliverance  is  no  longer  a  convict,  painfully  observing 
all  prison  rules  with  the  hope  of  shortening  his  sen- 
tence, but  a  child  in  the  home  of  God. 

There  are  experiences  of  another  kind  by  which 
the  faith  of  a  Christian  man  is  verified.  Of  these 
one  of  the  most  decisive  and  most  wonderful  is  the 
consciousness  that  through  Christ  he  has  passed 
into  the  eternal  and  Divine  order.  He  belongs  to 
two  worlds.  He  is  just  as  certain  that  he  is  en- 
vironed by  things  unseen  and  eternal  as  that  he  is 
environed  by  things  seen  and  temporal.  In  the 
power  of  the  life  given  to  him  in  the  new  birth  he 
has  entered  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  He  is  con- 
scious that  that  Diviner  region  is  now  the  native  land 
of  liis  soul.  It  is  there  that  he  finds  perfect  rest  and 
perfect  freedom.     It  is  a  relief  to  escape  to  its  eternal 


l6  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

peace  and  glory  from  the  agitations  and  vicissitudes, 
the  sorrows  and  successes,  of  this  transitory  world. 
It  is  not  always  that  he  is  vividly  conscious  of 
belonging  to  that  eternal  order;  this  supreme  blessed- 
ness is  reserved  for  the  great  hours  of  life ;  but  he 
knows  that  it  lies  about  him  always,  and  that  at  any 
moment  the  great  apocalypse  may  come.  And  even 
when  it  is  hidden,  its  "  powers  "  continue  to  act  upon 
him,  as  the  light  and  heat  of  the  sun  pass  through  the 
clouds  by  which  the  burning  splendour  is  softened 
and  concealed. 
,  /  Further,  "  in  Christ "  Christian  men  know  God  ; 
they  know  Him  for  themselves.  The  mere  concep- 
tion of  God  is  as  different  from  the  immediate 
knowledge  of  Him  as  the  mere  conception  of  the 
Matterhorn  from  the  actual  vision  of  it  as  an  external 
objective  grandeur ;  and  it  is  not  the  conception  of 
God,  but  God  Himself,  that  fills  them  with  awe  and 
wonder,  and  with  a  blessedness  which  trembles  into 
devout  fear.  Sometimes  the  "exceeding  weight  of 
glory"  is  too  great  to  bear,  and  human  infirmity  is 
relieved  when  the  vision  passes.  At  other  times  God 
is  more  than  a  transcendent  glory  to  be  contemplated 
and  adored.  His  infinite  love,  to  use  Paul's  words, 
is  sJicd  abroad  in  their  heart,  like  the  sun's  heat  under 
tropical  heavens ;  it  is  immediately  revealed.  How, 
they  cannot  tell,  any  more  than  they  can  tell  how 
the  material  world  is  revealed  to  sense  ;  they  only 
know  that,  apart  from  any  self-originated  effort,  apart 
from  any  movement  of  their  own  towards  Him,  the 


J 


THE  ARGUMEISTT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  17 

Eternal  Spirit  draws  near  to  their  spirit  and  reveals 
God's  love  to  them.  It  is  as  if  the  warm  streams  of 
the  love  which  have  their  fountains  in  the  depths  of 
His  infinite  life  were  flowing  round  them  and  into 
them.  They  are  conscious  of  that  love  for  them  of 
which  God  is  conscious. 

And  this  blessedness  is  not  the  prerogative  of  elect 
saints,  or  of  those  who  may  be  said  to  have  a  natural 
genius  for  spiritual  thought.  It  is  the  common  in- 
heritance of  all  that  are  "  in  Christ,"  although  there 
is  reason  to  fear  that  many  Christian  people  rarely 
reach  the  height  of  its  joy.  But  among  those  who 
reach  it  are  men  of  every  degree  of  intellectual  rank 
and  every  variety  of  moral  and  spiritual  temperament. 
It  is  reached  by  ignorant  men,  whose  thoughts  are 
narrow  and  whose  minds  are  inert,  as  well  as  by 
men  with  large  knowledge  and  great  powers  of 
speculation  ;  by  men  destitute  of  imagination,  as  well 
as  by  men  whose  imagination  kindles  as  soon  as  it 
is  touched  by  the  splendours  of  nature  or  by  the 
verses  of  poets.  Men  whose  whole  life  moves  slowly 
and  sluggishly  reach  it,  as  well  as  men  who  arc 
impulsive,  ardent,  and  adventurous.  And  where  this 
experience  is  known,  it  becomes  an  effective  force  in 
the  moral  life.  Peter,  writing  to  slaves,  says,  "  For 
this  is  acceptable,  if  through  consciousness  of  God  a 
man  endureth  griefs,  suffering  wrongfully."  ^ 


'  In  the  text  of  the  Revised  Version  the  words  stand,  "  If 
for  conscience  toward  God  "  ;  but  in  the  margin  an  alternative 
reading-  is  suggested,  "  If  for  conscience  of  God."     Tliis  was 
L,  C.  2 


iS  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXTERIENCE. 

y<  I  have  said  that  ''in  Christ"  men  know  God — not 
merely  through  Christ.  It  is  true  that  during  His 
earthly  ministry  He  revealed  God  ;  so  that,  in  answer 
to  the  prayer  of  one  of  His  disciples,  "Show  us  the 
Father,  and  it  sufficeth  us,"  He  said,  "  Have  I  been 
so  long  time  with  you,  and  dost  thou  not  know  Me, 
Philip?  he  that  hath  seen  Me  hath  seen  the  Father." 
That  revelation  has  eternal  power  and  value  ;  but 
there  are  other  words  spoken  by  Christ  that  same 
night  which  suggest  that  it  is  not  merely  by  the 
revelation  of  God  during  His  earthly  ministry  that 
Christ  has  made  it  possible  for  men  to  know  the 
Father.  He  said  :  "  I  am  the  true  vine,  and  ye  are 
the  branches.  .  .  .  Abide  in  I\Ie,  and  I  in  you. 
As  the  branch  cannot  bear  fruit  of  itself,  except  it 
abide  in  the  vine  ;  so  neither  can  ye,  except  ye  abide 
in  Me.  He  that  abideth  in  Me,  and  I  in  Him,  the 
same  beareth  much  fruit :  for  apart  from  Me  ye  can 
do  nothing."  It  is  not  certain  that  when  Paul  wrote 
his  Epistle  to  the  Galatian  Christians  he  had  heard 
of  these  words  ;  but  what  they  meant  he  had  learnt 

Wiclil's  translation,  wliicli  reads,  "If  for  conscience  of  Go.l 
men  suffcrcth  heaviness,  and  suffercih  unjustly,"  etc.  In  the 
older  English  writers  the  word  "  conscience "  is  often  used 
where  we  should  use  "  consciousness."  Hooker,  for  example, 
says,  "The  reason  why  the  simpler  sort  arc  moved  with 
authority  is  the  conscience  of  their  own  ignorance."  We  should 
say  "consciousness."  The  Greek  word  wliich  Peter  uses  has 
sometimes  the  one  meaning,  "consciousness,"  sometimes  the 
other,  "conscience."  In  i  Pet.  ii.  19  I  believe  that  it  mc.tns 
"  consciousness." 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  19 

for  himself.  Me  said,  "  I  live  :  and  yet  no  longer  I, 
but  Christ  UvetJi  in  me."  In  various  measures  the 
experience  of  Paul  has  been  the  experience  of  Chris- 
tian men  ever  since.  Their  relationship  to  Christ — 
their  conscious  relationship  to  Christ — has  been  most 
mysterious,  but  most  intimate  and  most  certain. 
They  have  meditated  on  the  infinite  love  which 
moved  Ilim  to  descend  from  the  heights  of  God  and 
to  become  man,  upon  His  graciousncss  and  gentle- 
ness, His  purity.  His  spontaneous  goodness.  His  pity 
for  suffering.  His  merciful  words  to  the  sinful,  His 
patience  and  His  longsuffering,  and  His  fiery  indig- 
nation against  hypocrisy  ;  they  have  meditated  on 
His  teaching,  on  all  the  words  of  His  that  have  been 
preserved  concerning  the  love  and  grace  of  God,  con- 
cerning the  remission  of  sins,  the  gift  of  eternal  life, 
the  judgment  to  come,  the  eternal  blessedness  of  the 
righteous,  and  the  doom  of  the  lost ;  they  have  felt 
the  spell  and  the  charm  of  that  ideal  perfection  to 
which  He  calls  them  in  His  precepts,  and  which  He 
illustrated  and  transcended  in  His  own  character : 
but  they  have  been  conscious  that  it  was  not  merely 
by  the  power  of  the  great  and  pathetic  story  of  His 
earthly  history,  or  by  the  power  of  His  spiritual  and 
ethical  teaching,  that  He  gives  to  men  the  life  of 
God,  and  constantly  renews,  sustains,  and  augments 
it.  They  shared  the  very  life  of  their  Lord.  He 
lived  in  them.  The}-  lived  in  Him.  And  it  was  in 
the  power  of  this  common  life  that  they  knew  God. 
Nor  is  it  only  the  immediate  knowledge  of  God 


20  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

that  is  rendered  possible  by  this  union  with  Christ. 
Christian  men  arc  conscious  that  they  do  not  receive 
strength  from  Christ  for  common  duty,  as  they  might 
receive  strength  from  One  who,  while  He  conferred 
the  grace,  stood  apart  from  them,  but  that  in  some 
,/^vonderful  way  they  are  strong  in  the  strength  of 
Christ  Himself  They  are  too  often  drawn  down 
into  the  region  of  baser  forces,  and  then  they  fail  ; 
but  their  very  failure  verifies  the  truth  of  their 
happier  experiences,  for  it  brings  home  to  them 
afresh  what  they  are  apart  from  Christ ;  and  when 
they  recover  their  union  with  Him — which  indeed 
had  not  been  lost,  though  for  a  time  it  was  not 
realized — they  recover  their  power. 

HI. 

The  man  who  has  had,  and  who  still  has,  such 
experiences  as  these  will  listen  with  great  tranquillity 
to  criticisms  which  are  intended  to  shake  the  his- 
torical credit  of  the  Four  Gospels,  although  the  story 
they  contain  may  have  been  the  original  ground  of 
his  faith  in  Christ.  The  criticism  may  be  vigorous  ; 
he  may  be  wholl}'  unable  to  answer  it :  but  what 
then?  Is  he  to  cease  to  believe  in  Christ?  \\'hy 
should  he  ? 

Let  me  answer  these  questions  by  an  illustration. 
Towards  the  close  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  wlicn  He 
was  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jericho — ^just  leaving 
the  city  or  just  entering  it — Bartimaeus,  a  blind  man, 
who  was  begging  at  the  side  of  the  road,  heard  that 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 


Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  passing  b}',  and  he  appealed 
to  the  great  Prophet  to  have  mercy  upon  him.  Jesus 
answered  his  appeal,  and  gave  him  sight.  Now  it 
is  possible  that  Bartim?eus  may  have  been  told  by 
some  passing  traveller,  of  whom  he  knew  nothing, 
the  story  of  a  similar  miracle  which  Jesus  had  worked 
a  iQ.V4  weeks  before  in  Jerusalem,  and  this  may 
have  been  the  ground,  and  the  only  ground,  of  his 
confidence  in  our  Lord's  supernatural  power.  If, 
after  he  had  received  his  sight,  some  sagacious  friend 
of  his  had  asked  him  how  it  was  that  he  came  to 
believe  that  the  Nazarene  Teacher  could  give  sight 
to  the  blind,  nothing  would  have  been  easier  than 
for  his  friend  to  show  that,  whether  the  story  of  the 
Jerusalem  miracle  was  true  or  not,  Bartimaeus  had 
no  trustworthy  evidence  of  its  truth.  A  tale  told 
by  an  unknown  stranger !  This  was  no  sufficient 
reason  for  believing  that  Jesus  had  given  sight  to 
a  man  born  blind.  Did  the  stranger  who  told  the 
tale  know  the  beggar  who  was  said  to  have  been 
cured  ?  Was  it  certain  that  the  man  was  blind  ? 
Mad  the  stranger  examined  his  eyes  the  very  morn- 
ing of  the  day  on  which  he  received  sight  ?  Was 
it  certain  that  the  vision  was  not  gradually  returning? 
Was  the  stranger  present  when  Jesus  made  the  clay, 
and  put  it  on  the  blind  man's  eyes  ;  close  enough  to 
see  that  no  delicate  operation  was  performed  during 
the  process  ?  The  sending  of  the  blind  man  to  wash 
at  the  Pool  of  Siloam  was  suspicious  :  what  could 
that  washing  have  to  do  with  a  miracle?     Did  the 


22  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 

stranger  go  with  the  man  to  the  pool,  and  keep  his 
eye  upon  him  while  he  was  there  ?  Was  it  quite 
certain  that  the  blind  beggar  who  was  sent  to  Siloam 
was  the  man  who  came  back  to  the  city  and  declared 
that  Jesus  had  healed  him  ?  Might  not  one  man 
have  been  sent  to  the  pool,  and  another  man  have 
come  back  to  Jerusalem  ?  It  looked  very  much  as  if 
there  v/cre  some  previous  understanding  between  the 
blind  man  and  the  Nazarene  Prophet.  The  Prophet 
had  rich  friends  ;  they  could  have  made  it  worth  the 
man's  while  to  come  into  the  plot.  Had  Bartimasus 
considered  all  these  difficulties?  Was  it  not  more 
probable  that  the  stranger's  story  should  be  false 
than  that  the  miracle  should  be  true  ?  Would  it  not 
be  well  for  Bartimasus  to  suspend  his  faith  in  Jesus 
until  he  had  made  further  inquiries  about  the 
miracle  ? 

Wc  can  imagine  the  answer  of  Bartim.'EUs.  I 
think  that  he  would  have  said  :  "  At  first  I  believed 
in  the  power  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  because  I  was  told 
that  He  had  given  sight  to  another  blind  man  ;  noio 
I  am  sure  of  His  power,  because  He  has  given  sight 
to  me.  It  is  possible,  as  you  sa\',  that  the  story 
about  the  blind  man  in  Jerusalem  is  not  true.  You 
have  asked  me  many  questions  \\liich  I  cannot 
answer.  I  cannot  explain  why  he  should  have  been 
sent  to  the  Pool  of  Siloam.  I  acknowledge  that  the 
evidence  which  1  have  for  the  miracle  is  not  decisive. 
As  Jesus  has  restored  my  sight,  I  think  that  the  story 
is  probably  true  ;    but  whether  the  story  is  true  or 


THE  ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  23 

not   cannot  disturb  my  faith  in   Him,   for   if  He  did 
not  heal  the  other  man,  He  has  healed  me." 

And  so  the  faith  in  the  Living  Christ  of  those  who 
have  had  the  great  experiences  of  His  power  and 
grace  which  I  have  described  is  not  shaken  by  any 
assaults  on  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the  story 
of  His  earthly  ministry.  Much  less  can  it  be  shaken 
by  discussions  concerning  the  nature  and  origin  of 
the  ancient  Scriptures  of  the  Jewish  people.  Their 
confidence  in  the  books,  both  of  the  Old  Testament 
and  the  New,  may  perhaps  have  to  be  suspended 
until  the  controversies  of  scholars  are  closed,  or  until, 
on  historical  and  critical  grounds,  they  can  see  their 
own  way  to  firm  and  definite  conclusions  about  the 
main  questions  at  issue  ;  but  not  their  confidence  in 
Christ.  They  may  be  uncertain  about  the  books ; 
they  are  sure  about  Him.  Both  Christian  scholars 
and  the  commonalty  of  Christian  people  approach  the 
controversies  on  these  ancient  records  with  a  settled 
faith  in  His  power.  His  grace  and  His  glory. 
Their  faith  in  Him  rests  on  foundations  v/hich  lie  far 
beyond  the  reach  of  scientific  and  historical  criticism. 
They  know  for  themselves  that  Christ  is  the  Saviour 
of  men  :  for  they  have  received  through  Him  the 
remission  of  their  own  sins  ;  Pie  has  translated  them 
into  the  Divine  kingdom ;  He  has  given  them 
strength  for  righteousness,  and  through  Him  they 
have  found  God. 


LECTURE    II. 

THE    VALIDITY  OF  THE  ARGUMENT  FROM 
EXPERIENCE. 

THE  argument  of  the  preceding  Lecture  may  be 
challenged.  It  rests  on  the  experiences  of 
Christian  men.  But  are  these  experiences  to  be 
trusted?  Do  they  satisfy  the  critical  understanding? 
Are  they  sufficient  to  justify  faith  in  Christ  ? 

I. 

In  reply  to  these  questions  it  might  be  sufficient, 
for  the  moment,  to  say  that,  while  experiences  of  this 
kind  are  strong  and  actually  present  they  covtmand 
certainty.  They  arc  as  decisive  and  as  irresistible  as 
our  physical  perceptions  of  light  and  darkness.  They 
leave  no  room  for  doubt.  But  I  suppose  that  there 
are  times  in  the  history  of  most  Christian  people 
when  the  consciousness  of  God  and  of  union  with 
Christ  becomes  faint,  and  is  even  wholly  lost,  nor 
arc  they  able  by  any  effort  to  recover  it ;  times  when, 
if  they  pray,  they  seem  to  be  speaking  into  blank 
space,  not  to  a  living  God  to  whom  they  are  akin, 
whose  knowledge  of  them  is  deeper  than  their  know- 
ledge  of  themselves,    and    whose    love    passes    the 


VALIDITY  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  25 

measures  of  their  faith  and  hope ;  times  when  all 
traces  of  those  diviner  powers  which  were  once 
active  in  them  seem  swept  away  by  the  insurgent 
forces  of  their  baser  Hfe,  which  spread  over  every 
province  of  their  nature,  creating  everywhere  con- 
fusion and  desolation.  In  these  dark  and  troubled 
days  there  are  some  firm  and  resolute  souls  that  hold 
fast  their  faith  in  Christ,  because  they  are  still  com- 
pletely assured  of  the  reality  of  what  they  saw  and 
felt  in  happier  times.  But  there  are  very  many  who 
are  assailed  by  terrible  doubts.  They  ask  whether, 
after  all,  they  can  be  so  certain  of  the  true  nature  of 
their  past  experiences  as  to  live  on  in  the  power 
of  them.  Those  instantaneous  moral  deliverances 
which,  at  the  time,  seemed  to  be  the  immediate  effect 
of  a  definite  volition  of  Christ's,  exerted  in  answer 
to  prayer,  may  they  not  have  had  another  cause? 
Those  movements  of  a  moral  and  spiritual  force 
which  seemed  at  the  time  to  be  the  manifestation  of 
the  exceeding  greatness  of  God's  power,  may  they 
not  have  come  from  unsuspected  fountains  of  strength 
in  their  own  life  ?  That  consciousness  of  God  as 
Another  than  themselves  which  gave  them  such  tran- 
scendent blessedness,  that  consciousness  of  living  in 
Christ  which  made  the  invisible  order  so  real,  may 
it  not  have  been  an  illusion — a  glorious  illusion,  but 
still  an  illusion,  and  nothing  more  ?  Are  they  sure 
that  their  personal  life  is  so  perfectly  health}',  and 
that  their  powers  are  so  trustworth}',  that  no  error 
was  possible  ? 


26  THE    VALIDITY  OF  THE 

With  Christian  men  whose  temper  is  speculative 
and  critical,  these  doubts  will  recur  frequently  ;  and 
not  only  in  times  of  spiritual  desertion.  They  will 
recur  most  frequently  with  persons  whose  religious 
life  is  predominantly  subjective,  and  whose  chief  and 
almost  exclusive  concern  is,  not  to  please  God  per- 
fectly, but  to  satisfy  themselves  that  they  are  pleasing 
Him  perfectly ;  who  are  very  anxious  to  be  sure 
of  their  own  love  for  God,  but  who  think  very  little 
of  God's  love  for  them  ;  who  dwell,  not  too  much  on 
their  own  duty,  but  too  little  on  God's  grace  and  on 
the  glory  of  the  Christian  redemption.  They  believe 
and  yet  they  doubt ;  and  their  introspective  habit 
makes  the  doubt  always  present ;  they  are  never  so 
possessed  and  mastered  by  the  great  objects  of  faith 
as  wholly  to  forget  it.  There  is  very  much  in  their 
experience  that  assures  them  of  the  presence  and 
power  of  Christ  :  they  arc  sometimes  strong  in  a 
strength  which  does  not  seem  to  be  their  own  ;  they 
are  sometimes  thrilled  by  the  consciousness  that  their 
higher  life  is  touching  the  very  life  of  God ;  they 
sometimes  think  that  they  are  living  in  Christ :  but 
they  are  not  sure  of  themselves.  May  not  all  these 
wonderful  experiences  be  as  unreal  as  the  delusions 
\\  hich  are  the  creations  of  a  fevered  brain  ? 

II. 
"The  creations  of  a  fevered  brain"  :  but  why  are 
we  sure,  when  we  are  ascending  the  valley  of  Zermatt, 
that  the  majestic  vision  of  the  Matterhorn  is  not  the 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  27 

creation  of  "  a  fevered  brain "  ?  or,  when  wo.  arc 
strolling  through  the  bazars  of  Cairo,  that  the  rich 
colours,  and  the  strange  costumes,  and  the  latticed 
windows,  and  the  crowds  of  people  of  many  races, 
and  the  water-carriers,  and  the  lounging  camels,  are 
not  projected  by  an  imagination  which  has  been 
filled  with  the  Arabian  NigJitsl  Or,  when  we  are 
listening  to  Handel's  mighty  hallelujahs,  why  are  we 
sure  that  orchestra  and  chorus,  and  the  tumult  and 
the  triumph  of  those  exulting  cries,  and  the  rush  of 
that  glorious  cataract  of  sound  are  not  a  private 
fancy  of  our  own,  an  illusion,  a  dream  ? 

If  for  a  moment  the  doubt  leaps  into  the  mind,  it 
vanishes  quickly,  when  we  find  that  other  men  see 
the  majestic  mountain  or  the  delightful  city,  and 
that  other  men  hear  the  victorious  hallelujahs. 

I  sometimes  wonder  whether  I  should  be  sure  that 
my  own  perception  of  the  sun  and  the  stars  is  trust- 
worthy if  I  alone  saw  them.  Suppose — the  supposi- 
tion is  no  doubt  grotesque — that  when  the  sun  rose, 
though  everybody  saw  and  knew  that  the  darkness 
had  gone  and  the  day  come,  nobody  but  myself  ever 
saw  the  sun  ;  and  that  when  the  day  was  spent,  though 
everybody  saw  and  knew  that  the  light  was  lessening, 
nobody  but  myself  ever  saw  the  splendours  dis- 
appearing behind  the  hills  or  sinking  into  the  sea. 
Suppose  that,  although  everybody  saw  and  knew  the 
difference  between  a  clear  and  a  cloudy  night,  no- 
body but  myself  saw  the  sparkling  diamonds  in  Ursa 
Major.     Suppose  that  no  trace  could  be  found,  cither 


2S  THE    VALIDITY  OF  THE 

in  ancient  or  modern  literature,  that  men  had  ever 
seen  these  heavenly  visions  ;  suppose  that  no  word 
for  sun  or  star  existed  in  the  languages  of  either  the 
East  or  the  West,  of  civilized  or  of  barbarous  races. 
Suppose,  further,  that,  while  I,  and  I  alone,  saw  the 
sun  and  the  stars,  many  other  men  had  a  keener  and 
surer  eye  than  mine  for  all  earthly  objects,  whether 
great  or  small,  whether  remote  or  near.  It  is  certain 
that  my  alleged  perceptions  would  be  regarded  by 
other  men  as  wholly  untrustworthy,  and  would  be  dis- 
cussed by  philosophical  persons  as  the  result  of  some 
abnormal  and  morbid  condition.  For  myself,  when 
I  actually  saw  the  sun  rising  morning  after  morning 
and  ascending  to  the  meridian,  and  when  I  actually 
saw  the  constellations  glittering  in  the  heavens  at 
night,  the  conviction  of  their  reality  would  be  irre- 
sistible ;  and  yet,  side  by  side  with  this  conviction, 
there  would  be  doubt — doubt  mastered  and  suppressed, 
but  with  life  in  it  still,  and  certain  to  grow  large 
and  strong  if,  for  many  days  and  weeks,  brooding 
clouds  concealed  the  celestial  glories. 

But  if,  here  and  there,  another  man  came  to  see 
what  I  saw  ;  if,  gradually,  groups  of  men,  men  of  very 
different  descriptions,  came  to  see  what  I  saw  ;  if 
these  groups  of  men  began  to  form  in  other  countries, 
in  distant  latitudes  and  under  distant  skies ;  and  if 
their  perceptions  corresponded  to  my  own  ; — if  then, 
by  some  surprising  discovery  of  a  lost  literature,  it 
became  certain  that  the  poets  of  a  vanished  people  had 
sung  of  the  stars  and  the  sunrise  and  the  sunset,  and 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  29 

that  tlieir  sailors  through  century  after  century  had 
taken  observations  of  the  celestial  bodies,  in  order  to 
steer  their  course  across  the  ocean  :  if  all  these  cor- 
roborations of  what  had  been  my  private  experience 
came  to  me,  I  should  become  sure  of  myself,  and  all 
doubt  would  vanish.  They  would  add  nothing  to  the 
vividness  and  certainty  of  my  consciousness  that  I 
saw  the  sun  and  stars,  but  they  would  destroy  the 
doubt  of  their  outward  reality  created  by  the  know- 
ledge that  other  men  did  not  see  them.  And  so 
the  knowledge  that  other  men,  as  the  result  of  their 
appeal  to  Christ,  have  passed  into  a  diviner  world, 
have  found  God,  have  received  accessions  of  strength 
which  they  could  not  attribute  to  any  sudden  libera- 
tion of  latent  energy  in  their  own  life,  have  broken 
the  chains  of  evil  habits,  have  seen  evil  passions 
wither  suddenly,  as  at  the  touch  of  an  unseen  hand, 
while  it  adds  nothing  to  the  distinctness  or  the  power 
of  similar  experiences  of  my  own,  relieves  me  from 
the  doubt  which  would  worry  my  faith  if  my  expe- 
riences were  solitary  and  unique.  It  saves  me  from 
distrust  of  my  own  consciousness. 

To  large  numbers  of  men  this  distrust  is  unknown. 
Their  life  is  wholesome,  healthy,  natural,  undisturbed 
by  the  nervous  solicitudes  of  the  introspective  habit. 
What  they  see  they  sec,  and  they  are  sure  that  the 
thing  they  see  is  tJiere ;  they  would  be  sure  of  it 
against  the  world.  What  they  hear  they  hear ;  that 
other  men  have  not  heard  it  suggests  no  uneasy 
suspicion  ;  that  other  men  have  heard  it  adds  nothing 


THE    VALIDITY  OF  THE 


to  their  confidence.  But  there  are  many — and  per- 
haps in  these  days  they  are  exceptionally  numerous 
— who  welcome  every  confirmation  of  the  trustwor- 
thiness of  their  own  consciousness.  As  an  English 
chemist  might  be  grateful  that  some  unexpected 
results  which  he  had  reached  in  his  own  laboratory 
had  been  reached  by  chemists  in  Paris  or  Vienna, 
who  had  made  their  experiments  under  different  con- 
ditions and  subjected  their  results  to  different  tests, 
so  there  are  many  men  who,  however  sure  they  may 
be  that  their  own  consciousness  bears  unambiguous 
testimony  to  the  nearness  and  free  personal  activity 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  value  the  support  which 
their  own  experience  receives  from  the  experience  of 
other  Christian  men. 

This  is  probably  a  large  part  of  the  explanation 
of  the  additional  strength  and  firmness  which  faith 
derives  from  the  biographies  of  saints  and  from  books 
of  devotion.  There  is  something  more  than  the  kind- 
ling of  the  religious  affections  through  contact  with 
devout  souls  in  their  most  ardent  moods  ;  and  there 
is  something  more  than  the  access  of  po\\-er  which 
results  from  receiving  into  the  mind  their  finer  con- 
ceptions of  the  majesty,  the  righteousness,  and  the 
infinite  grace  of  God.  Unconsciously  to  ourselves 
perhaps,  there  is  a  corroboration  and  verifying  of  the 
reality  of  our  own  experiences.  What  these  elect 
saints  saw  we  have  seen,  though  less  clearly.  What 
they  heard  we  have  heard.  W'e  have  passed  into  the 
same  world  as  that  in  which  they  lived  ;  we  recognise 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 


the  mountain  ranges  and  the  stars  that  shine  in  those 
fairer  heavens  :  to  them  the  glories  of  that  diviner 
order  were  transcendently  glorious  ;  to  us  they  are 
often  partially  concealed  by  cloud,  and  when  the 
cloud  breaks,  our  vision  cannot  bear  the  splendours 
for  long,  but  the  glories  are  the  same.  All  that  they 
report  concerning  what  the  grace  and  power  of  Christ 
achieved  for  them,  concerning  their  ascents  to  new 
heights  of  life,  and  their  access  to  God  through  Him, 
reminds  us  of  passage  after  passage  in  our  own 
personal  history.  What  they  found,  not  in  the  mere 
tradition  of  His  earthly  life  and  teaching,  much  less 
in  the  theology  of  the  Church,  but  in  Himself,  we 
too  have  found.  The  more  remote  they  were  from 
ourselves  in  their  ecclesiastical  associations,  in  their 
speculative  conceptions  of  Christian  truth,  in  all  the 
conditions  and  influences  which  determined  their 
religious  development,  the  more  impressive  is  the 
identity  betucen  their  experience  and  our  own. 

A  similar  corroboration  of  the  trustworthiness  of 
our  religious  consciousness  is  sometimes  given  to  us 
y^y  living  men.  I  suppose  that  not  unfrequently  a 
Christian  scholar,  whose  intellectual  certainties  con- 
cerning the  Christian  revelation  have  been  violently 
shaken  during  a  morning  spent  over  his  books,  has 
had  his  personal  faith  in  Christ  immeasurably 
strengthened,  v»-ithin  a  very  few  hours,  while  visiting 
the  sick,  the  aged,  and  the  poor.  He  had  begun  to 
wonder  whether,  after  all,  the  great  historic  conception 
of  Christ  in  the  Four  Gospels,  and  the  New  Tc^'Amcnt 


THE    VALIDITY  OF  THE 


story  of  the  rise  and  the  triumphs  of  the  Christian 
Church,  might  not  be  accounted  for  without  assuming 
that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the  Son  of  the  Eternal, 
the  eternal  Word  who  became  flesh  for  us  sinners 
and  for  our  salvation.  He  was  asking  himself 
whether  what  he  had  believed  were  his  own  most 
definite  experiences  of  the  present  power  of  Christ 
might  not  have  been  the  product  of  subtle  and 
mysterious  forces  in  his  own  life  —  forces  which, 
as  they  were  unknown,  and  not  under  the  direct 
control  of  his  own  will,  he  had  perhaps  too  incon- 
siderately attributed  to  an  external  source.  This  in 
the  morning.  In  the  afternoon  he  sat  by  the  side 
of  some  poor,  aged,  and  illiterate  man,  whose  strength 
was  slowly  wasting  and  the  conciitions  of  whose  life 
were  very  cheerless ;  but  the  old  man  had  travelled 
by  the  same  path  that  all  the  saints  have  travelled. 
His  words,  simple  and  rude,  about  what  Christ  had 
been  to  him,  and  done  for  him,  had  the  accent  of 
reality.  And  as  the  scholar  listened  he  could  recall, 
at  point  after  point,  identical  experiences  of  his  own. 
It  was  as  if  the  man  were  telling  the  story  of  years 
which  he  had  spent  in  some  foreign  country,  which 
the  scholar  also  had  visited.  They  had  seen  the 
same  cities  and  harbours  and  churches  and  palaces, 
the  same  ruins,  the  same  mountains  and  rivers,  the 
same  crops,  the  same  trees  and  flowers.  The  old 
man's  account  of  them  was  very  different  from  what 
his  own  account  would  have  been  ;  the  old  man's 
theories  and  explanations  of  them  and  his  own  were 


ARGUMENl    FROM  EXPERIENCE.  33 

Still  more  different  :  but  it  was  certain  that  what  he 
had  seen  the  old  man  had  seen. 

As  he  walked  home  he  remembered  corresponding 
experiences  which  had  been  told  him  by  other  men, 
and  of  which  he  had  read  in  the  lives  of  saints  of 
other  Churches,  other  countries,  other  times.  He 
felt  sure  that  different  men — men  belonging  to 
different  races  and  different  generations — could  not 
dream  the  same  dreams.  A  man's  private  illusions 
are  his  own.  If  other  men  see  what  he  sees,  hear 
what  he  hears,  feel  what  he  feels,  taste  what  he  tastes, 
he  may  dismiss  the  fear  that  his  organs  are  unsound. 
And  so  before  the  scholar  sat  down  to  his  desk  again 
at  night  he  had  recovered  confidence  in  the  trust- 
worthiness of  his  own  experiences.  He  had  still  to 
learn  whether  the  Four  Gospels  contain  an  authentic 
account  of  the  words  and  deeds  of  Christ  in  Jerusalem 
and  Galilee  more  than  eighteen  hundred  }'ears  ago  ; 
but  he  was  sure  that  in  our  own  time,  and  here  in 
England,  the  Living  Christ  is  the  Lord  and  Saviour 
of  men. 

HI. 

The  question  may  still  be  asked  whether,  while  the 
controversy  concerning  the  dates  and  the  authorship 
of  the  Four  Gospels  is  undetermined,  these  expe- 
riences can  be  a  valid  ground  for  believing  in  Christ. 

The  terms  of  the  question  need  explanation.  What 
is  meant  by  believing  in  Christ  ?  iDelieving  in  the 
traditional  opinion  concerning  the  dates  and  author- 

L.  c.  3 


34  THE    VALIDITY  OF   THE 

ship  of  the  Four  Gospels  ?  Believing  in  their  historical 
trustworthiness  ?  Believing  in  Luke's  account  of  the 
birth  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  of  the  appearance  to 
Mary  of  the  angel  who  announced  the  birth  of  our 
Lord  ?  Believing  in  the  story,  told  by  all  the  evan- 
gelists, of  our  Lord's  feeding  five  thousand  men  with 
five  barley  loaves  and  two  small  fishes  on  the  north- 
eastern shore  of  the  Lake  of  Galilee  ?  Believing  in 
the  story  told  by  John  of  the  raising  of  Lazarus  from 
the  dead?  If  this  is  what  is  meant  by  believing  in 
Christ,  then  clearly  no  valid  ground  for  believing  in 
Him  can  be  found  in  such  experiences  as  those  which 
I  have  described  in  this  and  in  the  preceding  Lecture. 
But  to  believe  in  Christ  it  is  not  necessary  that 
men  should  believe  that  Matthew  wrote  the  first 
Gospel,  and  Mark  the  second,  and  Luke  the  third,  and 
John  the  fourth  ;  men  believed  in  Christ  and  found 
God  in  Him  before  any  one  of  the  Gospels  was 
written.  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  believe  in  the  his- 
torical trustworthiness  of  any  one  of  the  four.  From 
Paul's  account  of  his  own  preaching,  it  appears  that 
he  told  the  Corinthians  "  first  of  all  .  .  .  that 
Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures  ; 
and  that  He  was  buried  ;  and  tliat  He  hath  been  raised 
on  the  third  day  according  to  the  Scriptures  ;  and 
that  He  appeared  to  Cephas  ;  then  to  the  twel\-c ; 
then  He  appeared  to  above  five  hundred  brethren 
at  once  ;  .  .  .  then  He  ai:)pearcd  to  James  ;  then 
to  all  the  apostles "  ;  and  last  of  all  to  himself.  A 
Corinthian  who  had  heard  this  wonderful  stor\-,  had 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE. 


believed  it,  and  had  trusted  in  Christ  for  the  remission 
of  sins  and  for  eternal  glory,  might  have  been  a  loyal 
and  zealous  Christian  for  many  years  before  he  met 
v»ith  any  of  our  present  Gospels.  If  the  first  that  came 
into  his  hands  happened  to  be  the  Gospel  of  Matthew, 
I  can  imagine  that,  without  any  faltering  of  his  faith 
in  Christ,  he  might,  for  a  time,  have  been  very  doubt- 
ful whether  it  liad  really  be  en  written  by  an  apostle, 
and  whether  it  v/as  trustworthy.  There  is  nothing  in 
it  about  our  Lord's  appearing  to  "  Cephas  "  alone,  or 
to  "  James  "  alone  ;  or  about  His  second  appearance  to 
"all  the  apostles";  or  about  His  appearing  to  "five 
hundred  brethren  at  once."  He  would  find  in  the 
story  many  sayings  of  Christ  of  which  probably  he 
had  never  heard  before,  but  which  he  would  feel 
no  other  teacher  could  have  spoken  ;  but  there  were 
other  sayings  about  which  for  a  time  he  might  be 
doubtful.  None  of  the  miracles  would  appear  to  him 
too  great  for  the  power  of  One  whom  he  worshipped 
as  Son  of  God  and  Saviour  of  men  ;  about  some  of 
them  he  might  have  heard  in  meetings  of  the  Church 
from  men  who  had  "  known  Christ  after  the  flesh," 
and  who  were  disposed  on  account  of  this  knowledge 
to  think  they  were  better  Christians  than  their 
brethren  who,  though  they  had  not  seen, had  believed; 
as  to  the  rest,  he  might  hesitate  until  he  was  fully 
assured  about  the  authorship  of  the  narrati\-e.  In  the 
power  of  his  faith  in  Christ  he  might  be  "steadfast, 
unmovable,  always  abounding  in  the  work  of  tlie 
Lord  "  ;  and  yet  he  might  be  uncertain  whether  the 


36  THE    VALIDITY  OF  THE 

new  story  of  Christ's  life  which  had  charmed  him  was 
really  written  by  an  apostle.  To  have  faith  in  Christ 
is  one  thing ;  to  have  a  sound  opinion  about  the 
authorship  of  a  book  is  another  thing  altogether. 
This  was  true  in  Corinth  in  the  first  century  ;  it  is 
just  as  true  in  England  in  the  nineteenth.  It  is  by 
faith  in  Christ  that  men  are  saved,  not  by  a  belief 
that  Matthew  wrote  the  first  Gospel. 

As  faith  in  Christ  is  something  wholly  different  from 
the  belief  that  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John  wrote 
the  four  narratives  of  our  Lord's  earthly  life  contained 
in  the  New  Testament,  so  it  is  wholly  different  from  a 
belief  in  the  authenticity  of  these  narratives.  If,  when 
my  heart  is  dark  with  the  sense  of  guilt,  and  all  my 
strength  is  broken  through  despair  of  the  Divine, 
mercy,  I  trust  in  Christ  for  forgiveness,  and  the  awful 
v/eight  which  crushed  me  is  removed,  and  the  light 
breaks,  and  I  am  conscious  that  in  the  mystery  of 
my  personal  relations  to  the  Eternal  a  great  change 
has  come,  and  that  God  has  absolved  me  ;  if,  having 
known  in  past  days  the  blessedness  of  living  in  the 
presence  of  God,  I  am  lonely  and  desolate  because  no 
sign  or  intimation  of  the  presence  of  God  is  given  me, 
and  I  trust  in  Christ  to  restore  me  to  God,  and  the 
vision  and  the  power  and  the  glory  return  ;  if  when 
the  springs  of  life  seem  to  have  dried  up,  and  there 
is  apathetic  indifference  to  all  those  invisible  and 
eternal  things  which  once  filled  me  with  a\\'e,  kindled 
fires  of  love  for  God  and  for  man,  created  an  exult- 
ing hope,  transfigured    the  world,  exalted   the   ideal 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  37 

of  conduct,  and  inspired  strength  and  resolution  to 
attempt  to  achieve  it — if  then  I  trust  in  Christ  to 
have  pity  on  me,  and  the  "  river  of  water  of  life 
bright  as  crystal,  proceeding  out  of  the  throne  of 
God,"  returns  to  its  deserted  channels,  and  rises  and 
overflows  its  banks :  if,  I  say,  Christ  in  answer  to 
my  faith  does  these  great  things  for  me,  what  more 
direct,  appropriate,  decisive  evidence  can  I  have  that 
He  is  the  Redeemer  and  Lord  of  men  ?  It  is  the 
precise  kind  of  evidence  that  I  need  to  authenticate 
and  confirm  my  faith  in  Him. 

Suppose  that  we  had  an  absolute  certainty  that 
Christ  wrought  every  miracle  attributed  to  Him 
by  the  four  Evangelists,  and  that  He  delivered,  not 
merely  the  substance  of  the  discourses  which  they  have 
recorded,  but  delivered  them  in  the  very  words  which 
have  reached  us  :  suppose  that  it  had  been  possible 
to  anticipate  and  to  satisfy  the  conditions  which 
alone,  according  to  M.  Renan,  could  make  a  miracle 
credible ;  suppose  that,  before  our  Lord  raised  the 
son  of  the  widow  of  Nain,  a  commission  had  been 
constituted,  composed  of  physiologists,  chemists,  great 
physicians,  men  distinguished  for  the  accuracy  of 
their  observation  and  their  mastery  of  the  laws  of 
evidence  ;  suppose  that  the  commissioners  had  fully 
assured  themselves  that  the  young  man  was  really 
dead  ;  suppose  that  they  had  designated  the  chamber 
in  which  the  miracle  was  to  be  wrought,  and  had 
taken  all  possible  precautions  to  prevent  deception  ; 
and  suppose  that  they  had  certified  that,  at  the  word 


38  THE    VALIDITY  OF   THE 

of  our  Lord,  the  }-oung  man  had  risen  from  the  dead 
and  walked  home  with  his  mother :  and  as  this 
single  wonder,  so  certified,  would  not,  in  M.  Renan's 
judgment,  have  been  a  decisive  proof  of  the  miraculous 
power  of  our  Lord,  but  would  only  have  created  "  a 
probability  almost  equal  to  certainty,"  suppose  that, 
when  Lazarus  died,  another  commission  similarly 
constituted  had  sat,  and  with  the  same  result : 
suppose — for  this  is  necessary  to  the  hypothesis — 
that  the  members  of  these  commissions  were  men 
who  had  as  large  and  exact  and  varied  a  knowledge 
of  the  physical  sciences  as  could  be  found  in  Paris, 
Vienna,  or  London  to-day,  as  keen  a  penetration, 
and  an  intellectual  habit  as  cautious  and  as  v/atchful  : 
suppose  that  the  conclusive  evidence  of  their  know- 
ledge and  of  their  skill  was  in  our  hands,  that  their 
integrity  was  beyond  all  doubt,  that  the  genuineness 
of  the  separate  reports  in  which  they  recorded  what 
they  had  seen  could  not  be  contested  :  suppose  that 
proofs  different  in  kind,  but  equally  demonstrative, 
assured  us  that  Christ  wrought  the  other  miracles 
preserved  in  the  story  of  the  evangelists — walked 
on  the  sea,  fed  thousands  of  men  with  a  fev/  loaves 
and  fishes,  gave  health  to  the  sick,  sight  to  the  blind, 
and  hearing  to  the  deaf:  suppose,  in  brief,  that  the 
evidence  of  the  historical  truth  of  the  Four  Gospels 
were  of  a  kind,  not  to  invite,  but  to  compel,  un- 
reserved and  unqualified  belief  in  every  fact  that  they 
contain  :  would  this — this  alone — be  sufficient  to  com- 
mand faith  in  Christ  ? 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  35 

Not  without  that  continued  experience  of  His 
great  power  and  infinite  grace  to  which  ever}'  gene- 
ration of  His  disciples  since  the  Ascension  has  borne 
y testimony.  For  what  would  be  our  condition,  even 
though  we  were  absolutely  certain  of  the  historic 
truth  of  the  story  of  His  earthly  life,  if,  after  He 
had  risen  from  the  dead  and  returned  to  the  Father, 
He  had  gi\en  no  sign  of  His  presence  and  activity 
in  the  spiritual  order  ;  if  through  these  eighteen  hun- 
dred years  He  had  delivered  no  penitent  from  the 
consciousness  of  guilt  ;  if  no  despairing  man,  v/eary 
of  his  evil  ways,  but  unable  to  forsake  them,  had  ever 
received  from  Him  strength  to_ throw  off  evil  habit?, 
and  to  suppress  sensual  and  malignant  passions  ;  if 
He  had  never  raised  those  who  trusted  in  Him  from 
sin  to  saintliness  ;'if  none  of  God's  lost  children  had 
been  found  by  Him,  and  brought  home  to  their 
Father?     Would  faith  in  Him  have  been  possible? 

Or,  if  the  wonderful  and  gracious  story  of  His 
earthly  ministry  created  an  invincible  conviction  that 
He  was  one  over  whom  death  could  have  no  power  ; 
and  if  we  made  a  great  venture,  and  appealed  to  Him 
to  forgive  and  pity  and  save  ns,  as  He  forgave  and 
pitied  and  saved  men  during  His  earthly ■  life :  how 
long  would  our  faith  in  Him  last,  if  there  came  no 
answer — no  breath  of  heavenly  air,  no  touch  of  Divine 
power,  no  light  of  comfort  or  of  hope?  The  historic 
certainty  could  not  sustain,  even  if  for  a  moment  it 
created,  faith  in  the  Lix'ing  Christ. 

And  now  let  me  make  another  supposition.     Ima- 


40  THE    VALIDIT\    OF  THE 


gine  that,  by  some  inexplicable  fatality,  the  last  three 
years  of  our  Lord's  earthly  life  had  sunk  into  abysses 
of  silence  and  oblivion  as  deep  as  those  in  which 
nearly  the  whole  of  His  years  from  childhood  till  He 
was  thirty  years  old  have  been  lost  ;  that  the  story  of 
no  miraculous  work  of  mercy,  the  record  of  no  word 
of  power  and  comfort  and  grace,  remained  ;  that 
we  knew  nothing  of  His  temptation.  His  tears  at  the 
grave  of  Lazarus,  His  agony  in  Gethsemane  ;  that 
neither  document  nor  tradition  preserved  the  sermon 
on  the  mount,  or  His  conversation  with  Nicodemus, 
or  the  parable  of  the  sower,  or  the  parable  of  the 
prodigal  son,  or  the  discourse  which  He  delivered  to 
His  elect  friends  during  the  night  in  which  He  was 
betrayed  ;  imagine  that  we  knew  nothing  more  than 
this — that  He  was  a  great  religious  teacher,  that  He 
had  been  crucified,  that  those  who  had  loved  Him 
believed  that  He  had  risen  from  the  dead.  If  this 
were  all  we  knew  of  His  earthly  histor}',  the  loss  to 
the  thought  and  life,  the  strength  and  the  joy  of  the 
Church  would,  no  doubt,  be  immeasurable.  But  it 
would  still  be  possible  to  believe  in  Him  as  the  Lord 
and  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  to  find  in  Him  eternal 
life  and  blessedness.  For  tJie  experience  of  the  CJinrcJi 
through  centiiiy  after  century  ivould  remain  to  bear 
%vitness  to  His  power  to  redeem  men  of  every  coujitry 
and  cveiy  race  and  every  age  who  trust  in  Him  for 
redemption.  It  would  still  be  certain  that,  from  the 
time  His  earthly  friends  had  their  last  vision  of  Him 
to  our  own  days,  men  of  every  description  have  dis- 


ARGUMENT  FROM  EXPERIENCE.  41 

covered  that  when  they  speak  to  Christ,  they  do  not 
speak  into  the  air,  but  that  He  answers  them,  gives 
them  peace  of  conscience,  strength  for  suffering  and 
for  righteousness,  and  the  immediate  knowledge  of 
God.  Those  who  knew  Him  "  after  the  flesh  "  bore 
witness  to  His  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and 
declared  that  through  Him  men  were  to  receive  the 
remission  of  sins  and  the  gift  of  eternal  life.  When 
that  generation  passed  away  the  Christian  Gospel  did 
not  become  a  mere  tradition,  resting  on  the  unsus- 
tained  authority  of  its  original  preachers ;  new 
preachers  arose  who  themselves  had  received  through 
Christ  the  remission  of  sins  and  the  gift  of  eternal  life. 
And  the  succession  has  been  unbroken.  Every  new 
generation  has  learnt  the  Christian  Gospel  from  living 
and  original  witnesses  to  the  power  and  grace  of  the 
Living  Christ,  and  has  then  transmitted  the  truth, 
confirmed  and  authenticated  by  its  own  experience, 
to  the  next.  And  so,  if  the  books  were  lost  which 
record  the  earthly  life  of  Christ,  my  faith  in  Him  as 
my  Saviour  from  sin,  the  Lord  of  conduct,  and  the 
Giver  of  eternal  life  would  still  rest  on  strong  and 
immovable  foundations  ;  for  my  personal  experience 
of  His  power  and  love  is  confirmed  by  the  experience 
of  sixty  generations  of  Christian  men.  I  find  that 
Christian  faith  often  fails  in  those  who  live  a  soli- 
tary religious  life  ;  but  I  find  that  it  is  strong  and 
vigorous  in  those  who  know  the  blessedness  and 
power  of  the  communion  of  saints. 


LFXTURE    III. 

THE  DIRECT  APPEAL   OF  CHRIST   TO    THE 
SPIRIT  OF  MAN. 

I. 

SIX  or  seven  years  ago,  I  had  the  honour  of  receiv- 
ing as  my  guest  a  Japanese  gentleman  who  had 
become  a  Christian.  He  spent  onl)'  a  few  hours 
under  my  roof — he  came  in  the  afternoon,  and  left 
the  next  morning  ;  but,  brief  as  the  time  was,  I  was 
impressed  by  his  moral  dignity,  his  nobleness,  devout- 
ness,  veracity,  and  force.  Those  who  knew  him  best 
had  a  deep  admiration  for  him  ;  and  he  had  shown 
the  energy  of  his  loyalty  to  Christ  by  making  a  great 
personal  sacrifice  in  the  service  of  the  Church  of 
which  he  was  a  member.  He  seemed  to  me  to  be 
one  of  those  men  who,  without  effort,  and  by  the 
mere  massiveness  of  their  nature,  assert  ascendency 
and  authority  over  other  men.  He  had  considerable 
intellectual  culture,  and  great  intellectual  activity  and 
vigour. 

At  night,  when  the  house  was  still,  I  asked  him 
how  it  was  that  he  became  a  Christian.  I  reminded 
him  that  he  and  his  countr}'mcn  were  wholly  sepa- 


THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  CHRIST  43 

rated  from  the  traditions  of  Christendom,  and  from 
that  unbroken  line  of  historic  continuity  by  which 
we  ourselves  are  united  to  those  who  first  recei\-ed 
the  Christian  Gospel.  As  we  Europeans  look  back 
over  the  Christian  centuries,  we  can  see  a  succession 
of  scholars,  theologians,  and  saints,  extending  from 
our  own  times  to  the  very  beginnings  of  the  Christian 
Faith.  We  can  ascend  from  age  to  age,  listening  in 
turn  to  the  testimony  of  every  generation  to  the 
power  and  grace  of  the  Living  Christ,  until  at  last 
we  listen  to  the  words  of  those  who  saw  and  heard 
the  original  apostles.  But  to  the  Japanese  this  great 
Christian  tradition  is  non-existent ;  to  them  no 
fires  light  up  the  vast  blackness  of  the  eighteen 
hundred  years  \\hich  separate  the  present  genera- 
tion from  the  first  generation  of  Christians.  I  also 
reminded  him  that,  although  the  thought  and  civi- 
lization of  Western  Christendom  had  recently  been 
exerting  an  immense  and  revolutionary  power  in 
Japan,  the  Christian  Faith  had  not  come  to  his 
countrymen  with  its  authority  unchallenged  ;  that  in 
the  foremost  nations  of  Europe  the  historical  trust- 
worthiness of  the  story  of  Christ  had  been  assailed  by 
men  of  great  eminence;  and  that,  side  by  side  with 
Christianity,  there  had  come  to  the  Japanese  a  varied 
and  powerful  literature,  which  impeaches  its  claims, 
and  calls  upon  Christian  nations  to  surrender  their 
Christian  faith  as  an  illusion.  This,  I  believe,  in 
substance,  though  not  in  form,  is  what  I  said  to  him 
in  illustration  of  my  question;  and  I  then  asked  him 


44  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  CHRIS7 


again  by  what  path  he  had  reached  his  faith  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  Son  of  God  and  Saviour  of  men. 

His  answer  I  can  recall  more  closely  and  more 
accuratcl)'.  He  said  :  "  I  was  a  Confucian,  and  I 
studied  the  works  of  Confucius  for  many  years.  One 
thing  at  last  perplexed  me.  Confucius  often  speaks 
of  all  good  things  as  coming  down  from  'heaven.' 
Sometimes  he  speaks  as  if  by  '  heaven '  he  meant 
a  living  and  benignant  Person,  who  consciously  be- 
stows blessings  on  mankind.  In  other  parts  of  his 
writings  it  seems  plain  that  this  cannot  be  his  mean- 
ing. But  the  thought  came  to  me  that,  perhaps, 
there  is  a  great  and  mighty  and  kindly  Person  above 
us,  and  this  excited  me.  I  wanted  to  know  whether 
it  was  true  ;  and  if  it  was,  I  wanted  to  learn  all  that 
could  be  learnt  about  Him.  With  this  anxiety  in  my 
mind,  I  listened  to  the  lectures  of  many  learned  men 
on  the  doctrine  of  Confucius,  but  did  not  find  what  I 
wanted.  At  last  I  heard  a  famous  Japanese  philo- 
sopher who  was  hostile  to  Confucianism,  and  was 
delivering  a  course  of  critical  lectures  on  it.  His 
lectures  made  me  more  dissatisfied  with  the  system 
than  ever. 

"Just  then  a  Japanese  convert  to  Christianity 
gave  me  a  Chinese  Bible,  and  asked  me  to  read  it. 
He  told  me  that  the  translation  was  a  great  achieve- 
ment of  scholarship,  and  that  I  should  be  charmed 
with  its  literary  beauty.  I  found  that  he  was  right  ; 
the  translation  is  admirable.  I  read  page  after  page 
V    till  I  came  to  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  Paul's  Plrst 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN.  45 

Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  beginning,  '  If  I  speak 
with  the  tongues  of  men  and  of  angels,  but  have  not 
love,  I  am  become  sounding  brass  or  a  clanging 
cymbal.'  I  read  the  whole  chapter.  I  was  arrested, 
fascinated.  I  had  never  seen  or  heard  or  dreamt  of 
a  morality  like  that.  I  felt  that  it  was  above  the 
reach  of  the  human  race,  that  it  must  have  come 
from  heaven,  that  the  man  who  wrote  that  chapter 
must  haye  received  light  from  God — from  God,  about 
whose  existence  I  had  been  speculating.  And  then 
I  read  the  Gospel  of  John,  and  the  words  of  Christ 
filled  mc  with  wonder.  They  were  not  to  be  resisted. 
I  could  not  refuse  Him  my  faith."  And  so  he  be- 
came a  Christian. 

The  story  is  worth  considering. 

When  my  Japanese  friend  received  so  profound  an 
impression  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  he 
asked  no  questions  about  the  author  to  whom  the 
Epistle  is  attributed  :  whether  he  claimed  to  have  had 
a  revelation  from  heaven  ;  whether  he  was  a  man  of 
a  sound,  healthy,  reasonable  mind,  or  whether  he  was 
likely  to  be  the  subject  of  illusions  ;  whether,  if  a 
revelation  had  really  come  to  him,  all  his  teaching 
was  to  be  received  as  the  exact  expression  of  the 
mind  of  the  Eternal ;  whether  he  wrought  miracles 
in  proof  of  his  Divine  commission  to  make  known  to 
men  a  new  faith,  and,  if  he  claimed  to  work  miracles, 
what  evidence  authenticated  them  ;  whether  it  was 
quite  certain  that  the  Epistle  was  written  by  the  man 
whose  authority  was  so  accredited  ;  and  whether,  if 


46  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  CHRIST 

originally  written  by  him,  it  was  certain  that  the  true, 
uncorrupted  text  had  been  preserved  in  the  Christian 
Scriptures.  None  of  these  questions  seem  to  have 
even  occurred  to  my  friend  ;  if  they  occurred,  they 
were  at  once  dismissed  as  irrelevant.  Had  Paul 
received  light  from  heaven?  The  light  zuas  there: 
my  friend  saw  it — saiv  it  for  Jiiinself.  He  was  sure 
that  it  could  have  come  from  no  inferior  source. 

And  when  he  was  reading  the  Fourth  Gospel,  he 
did  not  check  his  wonder  and  awe  by  asking  ques- 
tions about  the  authorship  of  the  book.  He  did  not 
ask  who  John  was,  whose  name  stands  in  the  title 
of  it,  or  how  he  was  to  knov/  that  John  v.TOte  it. 
The  story  of  the  cure  of  the  paralytic  man  at  the  Pool 
of  Bethesda,  the  story  of  the  feeding  of  five  thousand 
men  with  five  barley  loaves  and  two  fishes,  the  story 
of  the  gift  of  sight  to  the  beggar  who  had  been 
blind  from  his  birth,  the  story  of  the  resurrection 
of  Lazarus — these  were  all  very  surprising,  but  my 
friend  does  not  seem  to  h.a^■e  separated  miracle 
from  miracle,  in  order  to  find  out  whether  the  writer 
was  actually  present  at  every  one  of  them.  He  did 
not  subject  each  miracle  to  close  scrutin}',  in  order 
to  discover  whether,  apLcr  all,  some  natural  explana- 
tion of  it  might  not  be  possible.  He  had  a  mascu- 
line understanding,  disciplined  both  b}'  severe  studies 
and  by  familiarity  with  afiairs  ;  it  would  have  been 
natural  for  him  to  withhold  his  belief  from  such 
stori.j  as  these:  but  the  vision  of  glory  which  came 
to  him  while  reading  John's  account  of  our  Lord's 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  JIIA.V.  ^y 

life  and  teaching  was  a  vision  from  another  and 
diviner  world  ;  he  fell  at  the  feet  of  Christ,  exclaim- 
ing, ]\Iy  Lord  and  my  God!  He  did  not  ask  whether 
the  transcendent  perfection  could  have  been  the  crea- 
tion of  the  love  and  reverence  of  Christ's  disciples : 
the  question  was  impossible  ;  it  would  have  been  as 
easy  to  ask  whether  the  splendours  of  Orion  could 
have  been  kindled  from  earthly  fires.  He  saic  the 
Divine  majesty  and  the  Divine  grace  of  Christ :  \\hat 
could  he  do  but  worship  Him? 

If  at  any  later  time  he  had  begun  to  doubt  whether 
he  had  really  seen  God  when  he  saw  Christ,  his 
doubt  would  have  received  its  answer  in  his  personal 
experience  of  the  reality  of  the  Christian  redemption. 

n. 

This  was  a  case  in  which  faith  was  created  by  the 
clear  vision  of  the  Divine  glory  in  Christ ;  but  there 
had  been  a  long  and  effective  preparation  for  faith. 
When  the  question  concerning  the  conscious  life  and 
personality  of  the  Supreme  v/as  raised  by  the 
ambiguities  of  Confucius,  my  friend  did  not  regard  It 
as  being  nothing  greater  than  a  subject  of  curious 
and  interesting  philosophical  inquiry.  It  was  a 
question  v/hlch  gave  him  no  rest.  It  reached  down 
to  the  foundations  of  the  world  and  of  human  life. 
The  depths  of  his  heart  were  moved.  He  w^as  not 
afraid  to  learn- that  there  is  a  Living  God  ;  if  he  could 
only  be  certain  that  the  "  heaven  "  of  which  Confucius 
had   .<=poken  was  the   name   of  an  august  Person — ■ 


48  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  CHRIST 

righteous,  beneficent,  in  whom  men  Hve  and  move 
and  have  their  being — this  would  be  strength  and 
blessedness.  The  Light  which  lightcth  every  man 
had  pierced  the  clouds,  and  he  loved  the  light,  and 
longed  to  be  more  sure  of  it.  When  he  read  John's 
Gospel  he  found  the  light  which  he  had  been  longing 
for.  Men  ought  to  know  God  when  they  see  Him. 
My  friend,  when  he  saw  God,  knew  Him. 

^  In  his  case,  as  I  have  said,  it  was  the  vision  of  God 
in  Christ  which  created  faith  ;  in  the  case  of  those 
who  are  already  Christians,  that  vision  confirms 
faith. 

Their  Conscience  confesses  that  Christ  is  God.  Apart 
from  Christ,  the  authority  of  Conscience  is  supreme. 
She  asks  no  inferior  or  co-ordinate  power  to  support 
her  claims  ;  her  accent  is  regal  ;  from  her  word  there 
is  no  appeal.  And  to  Christian  men  Christ  becomes 
an  objective  conscience.  They  do  not  argue  that 
Christ  wrought  miracles  ;  that  therefore  it  is  certain 
that  He  came  from  God  ;  and  that  therefore  He  must 
be  obeyed.  His  word  is  enough.  Conscience  recog- 
nises in  Him  the  rightful  Lord  of  conduct,  and  does 
Him  homage.  He  speaks,  "not  as  the  scribes," 
nor  even  as  the  prophets  of  the  older  Faith,  or  as 
the  apostles  of  the  new.  He  stands  alone  and  apart, 
the  very  Voice  and  Word  of  the  eternal  Law  of 
righteousness. 

Nor  is  it  conscience  alone  that  discovers  His  glory. 

^  He  appeals^  and  appeals  immediately ,  to  all  those  ele- 


TO   THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN.  49 

ments  and  powers  of  life  that  give  ansiver  to  the 
manifestations  of  the  presence  of  God.  What  it  is  to 
find  God  or  to  be  found  of  God  every  devout  man 
knows,  but  the  secret  cannot  be  told.  We  feel  His 
touch,  and  \vc  know  that  the  unseen  Hand  can  be 
only  His.  There  is  a  power  upon  us,  and  we  need 
no  visible  sign  or  symbol  to  assure  us  that  it  is  the 
power  of  the  Eternal.  A  light  shines  ;  we  know  that 
it  is  Divine.  In  solitary  places, — on  the  hills,  by  the 
sea,  among  the  cornfields,  in  the  woods, — in  the 
crowded  streets  of  great  cities,  the  glory  finds  us.  It 
finds  us  when  we  do  not  seek  it ;  sometimes  when  we 
seek  we  cannot  find  it.  And  to  Christian  men  these 
great  hours  often  come  when  they  are  reading  the 
Four  Gospels.  They  witness  a  diviner  transfigura- 
tion than  that  which  Peter,  James,  and  John  saw  on 
the  sides  of  Plermon.  They  become  independent  of 
the  proof-texts  on  which  biblical  theologians  have 
built  their  argument  for  our  Lord's  divinity  ;  as  they 
read,  Christ  commands  their  reverence,  their  love,  their 
worship.  They  may  know  nothing  of  theological 
definitions,  they  may  be  perplexed  by  the  terms  of  the 
creeds  ;  but  to  them  Christ  is  what  God  is,  and  apart 
even  from  the  authority  of  His  own  words,  it  would 
be  in  their  hearts  to  say  that,  having  seen  Him,  tlicy 
have  seen  the  Father. 

III. 

Are    they   deceived?     May   not    the   vision    be    a 
dream  ?     Many  of  them  would  reply  that,  whether 
L.  C.  4 


$:>  THE  DIRECT  .4  PEE  A  L    OE  CIJRJS7 

they  are  deceived  or  not,  the  impression  produced 
on  them  by  the  story  of  Christ  in  the  Gospels  is 
irresistible.  As  they  are  so  made  that  fire  burns 
and  ice  chills  them,  they  are  so  made  that  the  story 
of  Christ,  in  its  substance,  compels  by  a  kindly  com- 
pulsion— or  rather,  inspires  by  a  gracious  force — a 
complete  faith  in  its  truth  ;  they  could  as  easily 
doubt  the  reality  of  the  material  universe  as  doubt 
the  reality  of  the  historic  Christ.  They  would 
say  that,  however  it  may  be  with  others,  hov/ever  it 
may  be  even  with  many  who  share  their  faith,  there 
is  for  them  no  necessity  that  the  historical  "  wit- 
nesses "  should  show  their  credentials  ;  they  care  very 
little  about  the  historical  "witnesses";  for  them 
the  story  itself  is  like  one  of  the  grander  objects 
of  nature — it  could  not  have  been  man's  work.  It 
may,  indeed,  bear  traces,  easily  recognisable,  of  the 
intervention  of  human  agency,  as  there  are  easily 
recognisable  traces  of  the  intervention  of  human 
agency  in  the  roads  and  paths  on  the  sides  of  Hel- 
vellyn,  and  in  the  piers  and  docks  on  the  shores 
of  the  Atlantic.  But  no  human  hands  created  Hel- 
vellyn  or  the  Atlantic.  The  mountain  was  there,  the 
ocean  and  its  shores  were  there,  before  human  hands 
touched  them  ;  and  what  human  hands  have  done 
has  not  effaced,  has  not  obscured,  their  true  origin 
and  greatness.  And  no  human  devotion  or  genius 
created  the  Figure  of  the  historic  Christ.  lie  was 
there,  He  must  have  been  there,  before  His  story  was 
'told  by  the  evangelists;  and  whatever  signs  of  human 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAJV.  51 

limitation  and  infirmity  may  be  found  in  the  story 
cannot  diminish  the  force  of  the  impression  that  it 
is  in  substance  a  true  account  of  a  unique  manifes- 
tation of  the  Person  and  Life  of  God  under  the 
conditions  which  determine  the  manifestation  of  the 
pcrsonaHty  and  hfe  of  man. 

To  those  who  have  seen  God  in  the  historic  Christ, 
the  trustworthiness  of  the  story,  as  satisfying  the 
ordinary  tests  of  historic  credibihty,  is  no  doubt  an 
inquiry  of  great  interest,  but  it  is  not  of  primary 
importance.  The  proof  that  the  writers  were  honest 
and  intelh'gent  men,  and  that  they  were  actual  wit- 
nesses of  Christ's  wonderful  works  and  actual  hearers 
of  His  great  discourses,  or  that  they  learnt  what  they 
have  told  us  from  other  persons  who  had  this  original 
knowledge  of  what  Christ  did  and  taught,  or  that 
their  story  was  received  as  authentic  by  persons  who 
had  the  best  means  of  knowing  whether  it  was  the 
story  which  had  been  told  by  apostles,  is  not  the 
condition  precedent  of  confidence  in  the  substantial 
truth  of  their  narratives.  For  the  history  is  not  an 
ordinary  history  ;  if  it  were,  it  v/ould  stand  or  fall  by 
the  ordinary  historical  tests.  It  is  wholly  exceptional. 
Instead  of  resting  upon  the  demonstrated  credibility 
of  the  evangelists,  it  demonstrates  their  credibility. 

There  is  nothing  unreasonable  in  this.  On  the 
Christian  hypothesis  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was 
the  eternal  Word  who  became  flesh  and  dwelt  among 
men  "  full  of  grace  and  truth,"  and  that  His  disciples 
"beheld    His   glory,   glory  as   of  the  only  begotten 


$2  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  C//AVST 

from  the  Father," — on  this  hypothesis,  we  may  expect 
that  the  true  story  of  His  earthly  Hfc  will  carry  with 
it  its  own  authentication.  Is  it  wonderful,  is  it  in 
any  sense  contrary  to  reason,  that  those  who  know 
God  should  recognise  the  accent  of  God  in  the  words 
of  His  eternal  Son,  and  the  power  and  life  of  God 
in  His  character  and  history  ? 

IV. 

But,  as  I  have  said,  even  those  whose  direct  vision 
of  the  glory  of  God  in  Christ  has  been  clearest  are 
not  undisturbed  by  the  clamorous  protests  of  the 
inferior  forces  of  their  nature  against  the  reality  of 
the  objects  of  faith  ;  and  they  have  to  reckon  with 
that  critical  faculty  which  is  for  ever  questioning 
the  trustworthiness  and  analysing  the  contents  of 
consciousness. 

Let  no  one  suppose  that  Christian  men  know 
nothing  of  the  philosophy  of  illusions,  nothing  of  the 
mysteries  and  enchantments  which  are  worked  by 
invisible  powers  in  the  secret  laboratories  of  life ; 
that  they  have  not  discovered  how  easy  it  is  for  the 
mind  to  impress  its  own  forms  on  the  objects  of 
perception,  and  to  give  them  its  own  colour ;  how 
easy  for  the  imagination  and  for  strong  emotion — 
apart  from  volition  and  against  the  strenuous  effort 
of  volition — to  give  such  a  body  to  subjective  expe- 
riences that  for  the  time  they  have  all  the  solidity  of 
objective  realities.  They  too  have  had  their  dreams  ; 
and  the  dreams  were  so  vivid  that,  when  they  woke, 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN.  53 

the  world  of  dreams  seemed  the  real  world,  and  the 
real  world  a  world  of  dreams.  They  have  seen 
ghosts — ghosts  projected  into  the  common  air  by- 
some  morbid  and  abnormal  action  of  interior  powers 
which  have  no  name  ;  ghosts  gracious  and  kindly, 
ghosts  cruel  and  terrible.  They  have  learnt  to  scru- 
linise  and  to  test  with  the  coolest  and  most  judicial 
impartiality  the  higher  experiences  of  the  soul.  And 
their  perception  of  the  Divine  glory  in  the  historic 
Christ  stands  the  closest  scrutiny  and  the  severest 
tests. 

They  know  that  in  the  hours  in  which  they  are 
surest  that  they  are  living  in  the  Divine  order,  the 
glory  of  Christ  is  clearest  and  most  unclouded,  and 
that  when  they  have  the  calmest  and  yet  the  strongest 
consciousness  of  the  nearness  of  the  Eternal  the 
glory  of  Christ  is  most  Divine.  They  know  that  in 
some  wonderful  way  the  historic  Christ  clears  and 
strengthens  that  great  faculty — whatever  it  may  be 
named — by  which  they  are  immediately  conscious  of 
God.  They  know  that,  instead  of  their  conception 
of  God  being  contracted,  dimmed,  impoverished  by 
finding  God  in  Him,  it  is  indefinitely  expanded  and 
ennobled  and  filled  with  a  purer  and  intenser  light. 
The  incarnation  of  Christ,  His  miracles,  His  good- 
ness. His  sanctity,  His  gentleness,  and  His  strength. 
His  common  human  experiences.  His  blessed  life  in 
the  Father,  His  promises,  His  menaces,  the  shedding 
of  His  blood  for  "  the  remission  of  sins,"  His  resur- 
rection, His  ascension — these  create  a  conception  of 


54  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL   OF  CHRIST 

the  Eternal  far  transcending,  not  merely  in  tender- 
ness, but  in  grandeur  and  in  majesty,  and  in  all 
those  elements  of  power  which  command  reverence 
and  awe,  any  conception  of  Him  created  by  the 
immensities  of  space  filled  with  the  splendours  of 
His  countless  worlds,  or  by  the  immensities  of  time 
through  which,  unfainting  and  unwearied,  He,  in  His 
solitary  strength,  has  sustained  the  burden  of  all 
created  things. 

V. 

That  the  vision  of  God  in  the  historic  Christ  is 
no  illusion  is  verified  by  its  correspondence  with  that 
knowledge  of  the  Living  Christ  which  is  given  in 
the  personal  experience  of  Christian  men.  For  the 
Living  Christ,  who  is  the  object  of  Christian  faith, 
and  whose  presence  in  the  Christian  consciousness 
is  the  most  potent  force  in  the  Christian  life,  is  God, 
and  yet  Another  than  God  ;  He  is  man,  and  yet  in- 
finitely more  than  man.  If  His  liumanity  is  now  trans- 
figured by  His  Divine  glory,  there  was  a  time  when 
His  Divine  glory  was  manifested  under  the  common 
conditions  of  humanity.  The  Christ  who  is  on  the 
throne  of  the  Eternal  once  lived  here.  And  Christian 
men  are  certain  that,  whatever  imperfections  may  be 
detected  in  the  story,  they  recognise  in  the  Christ 
of  the  Four  Gospels  the  same  august  Person  of  whom 
they  have  an  immediate  knowledge,  and  in  whom 
they  have  found  eternal  life  and  eternal  redemption. 
The  conception  of  the  Historic  Christ  given  in  the 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN.  55 

Gospels  is,  in  its  substance,  identical  with  the  concep- 
tion of  the  Living  Christ  given  in  their  own  con- 
sciousness.    They  interlock.     They  blend  into  one. 

It  is  conceivable  that  we  might  have  known 
nothing,  cither  from  authentic  documents  or  from 
tradition,  of  our  Lord's  earthly  history.  Our  historic 
knowledge  of  Him  might  have  been  no  ampler 
than  that  brief  Gospel  Vvhich  Paul  say.s  that  he 
preached  to  the  Corinthians,  and  which  I  quoted  in 
the  last  Lecture  :  "  I  delivered  unto  you  first  of  all 
that  Mhich  also  I  received,  how  that  Christ  died 
for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures  ;  and  that 
He  was  buried  ;  and  that  He  hath  been  raised  on 
the  third  day  according  to  the  Scriptures  ;  and  that 
He  appeared  to  Cephas  ;  then  to  the  twelve  ;  then 
He  appeared  to  abo\c  five  hundred  brethren  at 
once  ;  .  .  .  then  He  appeared  to  James  ;  then  to 
all  the  apostles  ;  and  last  of  all,  as  unto  one  born  out 
of  due  time.  He  appeared  to  me  also."  Whatever 
Paul  may  have  told  the  Corinthians  afterwards,  his 
Gospel  appears  to  have  begun  with  Christ's  death, 
burial,  and  resurrection  ;  and  he  then  went  on  to 
recite  our  Lord's  appearances  to  His  apostles  and 
disciples  during  the  forty  days  between  the  resur- 
rection and  the  ascension,  and  last  of  all  to  himself 
It  is  conceivable,  I  say,  that  wc  might  have  known 
nothing  of  that  pathetic  and  glorious  history  which 
preceded  the  crucifixion  ;  for  us,  the  Gospel  might 
have  begun  with  the  death  of  Christ  "  for  our  sins." 
Or,  if  we  had  known  more,  our  additional  knowledge 


56  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  CHRIST 

might  have  been  h'mitcd  to  the  brief  summary  of 
our  Lord's  ministry  contained  in  Peter's  discourse  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost :  "  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  a  Man 
approved  of  God  unto  you  by  mighty  works  and 
wonders  and  signs,  which  God  did  by  Him  in  the 
midst  of  you,  even  as  ye  yourselves  know  ;  Him, 
being  dcHvered  up  by  the  determinate  counsel  and 
foreknowledge  of  God,  ye  by  the  hand  of  lawless 
men  did  crucify  and  slay."  Of  Christ  "after  the 
flesh  " — Christ  in  His  place  and  work  and  sufferings 
in  the  natural  and  visible  order  of  the  world — we 
might  have  known  nothing  more  than  this. 

Now,  if  all  tradition  of  the  earthly  Christ  had  been 
lost  to  us,  how  impossible  it  would  have  been  to 
construct  an  imaginary  history  of  the  years  of  His 
humiliation  which  would  not  have  been  incongruous 
with  what  we  know  of  Him  in  His  eternal  glory — 
a  history  which  would  have  given  us  the  impression 
that  He  was  really  man,  and  yet  the  Son  of  the 
Eternal.  But  there  is  unbroken  continuity  between 
the  earthly  life  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  given  in 
the  Gospels  and  His  present  relations  both  to  the 
Father  and  the  human  race.  He  is  "  the  same  yes- 
terday and  to-day,  yea,  and  for  ever."  The  earthly 
Christ  and  the  heavenly  Christ  arc  one. 

lie  was  truly  man  :  was  born,  grew  up  from  in- 
fancy to  childhood,  and  from  childhood  to  youth 
and  manhood.  He  hungered  and  thirsted  ;  when 
He  was  weary  He  slept  ;  the  sweat  fell  off  from  Him 
in  His  agony;   He  was  crucified  as  a  criminal;    He 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN.  57 

died.  He  grew  in  knowledge,  and  even  in  His 
maturity  His  knowledge,  like  ours,  had  its  limits. 
He  had  the  common  affections  as  well  as  the 
common  relationships  of  the  race  ;  some  of  His 
friends  were  dearer  to  Him  than  the  rest.  He  was 
dependent  on  the  Father  as  we  are  dependent  ;  He 
was  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit  ;  He  was  tempted  ; 
He  prayed.  When  He  was  "  made  flesh,"  He  ac- 
cepted all  the  conditions  of  human  life,  and  He  never 
violated  them.  And  yet  from  the  very  first  there 
were  premonitions  and  manifestations  of  His  unique 
greatness.  He  was  born — but  not  as  other  children 
arc  born.  An  angel  came  to  the  Jewish  maiden  who 
was  destined  to  be  His  mother,  and  brought  her  this 
surprising  message  :  "  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  come 
upon  thee,  and  the  power  of  the  Most  High  shall 
overshadow  thee :  wherefore  also  that  which  is  to  be 
born  shall  be  called  holy,  the  Son  of  God."  Before 
His  birth  the  power  of  prophecy  came  on  her.  Soon 
after  He  was  born  an  angel  appeared  to  shepherds 
who  were  watching  their  sheep,  and  told  them  that 
the  Christ,  for  whose  coming  the  elect  nation  had 
been  waiting  for  centuries,  had  come  at  last  ;  and 
then  they  heard  "  a  multitude  of  the  heavenly  host 
praising  God,  and  saying.  Glory  to  God  in  the 
highest,  and  on  earth  peace  among  men  in  whom 
He  is  well  pleased."  While  He  was  still  at  Bethle- 
hem, wise  men  from  the  East,  who  had  seen  a 
wonderful  appearance  in  the  heavens,  which  for  them 
was  the  sign  of  the  birth  of  that  great  Jewish  Prince 


SS  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL    OF  CHRIST 

of  whose  approaching  advent  there  were  vague  anti- 
cipations in  many  lands,  came  to  worship  Him.  Of 
His  childhood  we  have  only  a  passing  glimpse.  At 
twelve  years  of  age  He  is  in  Jerusalem  at  a  great 
feast ;  and  for  Him  the  temple  is  His  "  Father's 
house,"  in  which  Mary  and  Joseph  might  have  been 
certain  that  they  would  find  Him  ;  and  He  is  "sitting 
in  the  midst  of  the  doctors,"  with  open  mind,  eager 
to  learn  all  that  they  can  tell  Him,  but  asking  such 
questions  and  giving  such  answers,  that  "all  that 
heard  Him  were  amazed  at  His  understanding." 

When  His  public  ministry  began  there  was  some- 
thing new  and  strange  about  His  teaching.  It  had 
a  singular  attractiveness  and  charm  ;  men  "  wondered 
at  the  words  of  grace  which  proceeded  out  of  His 
mouth."  He  spoke — men  felt  it — on  the  strength 
of  an  original  and  direct  knowledge  of  God  and  the 
will  of  God  ;  He  quoted  the  Scriptures,  and  they  had 
their  use  for  Him,  else  how  could  He  have  been 
man  ?  but  through  Him  a  fresh  word  of  God  \\z.s 
heard  :  "  He  taught  as  one  having  authority,  and  not 
as  their  scribes." 

His  miracles  fill  the  people  with  v/onder.  They 
are  gracious,  kindly  miracles.  He  does  not  seek 
occasions  for  displaying  His  power  ;  He  exerts  it  as 
men  need  it.  Some  of  these  "  signs  "  have  a  curiously 
felicitous,  but  most  natural,  connexion  with  events 
and  circumstances  which  illustrate  most  vividly  the 
reality  of  His  human  nature.  He  has  had  an  ex- 
hausting day,  and  is  sleeping  in  the  boat  in  which 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  Of  MA.V.  59 

He  and  His  disciples  were  accustomed  to  pass  from 
one  point  of  the  shore  of  the  Lake  of  GaHlce  to 
another — sleeping  so  soundly  because  of  His  exhaus- 
tion that  the  storm  docs  not  wake  Him.  How  truly- 
human  He  is !  But  He  is  roused  by  His  friends, 
who  are  in  great  terror ;  and  as  soon  as  He  is 
awake,  He  stands  up  in  the  boat,  and  rebukes  the 
winds  and  the  sea,  and  there  is  a  great  calm.  He 
is  much  more  than  man. — At  the  grave  of  Lazarus, 
for  whom  He  had  a  strong  affection,  He  is  troubled  ; 
the  tears  of  INIary  and  of  the  Jews  who  are  wailing 
for  the  dead  move  Him  profoundly  ;  He  struggles 
with  the  violence  of  His  emotion  ;  He  weeps.  There 
is  all  the  anguish  of  human  sympathy  and  human 
bereavement.  But  presently  He  cries  with  a  loud 
voice,  "  Lazarus,  come  forth  !  "  And  His  dead  friend 
appears  at  His  call,  and  returns  home  with  Martha 
and  Mary.     He  speaks  in  the  power  of  God. 

The  impression  of  "  authorit}',"  and  of  an  authority 
of  an  altogether  unique  kind,  produced  by  His  earlier 
ministry  is  deepened  as  His  teaching  becomes  fuller 
and  more  explicit.  There  is  a  new  accent  in  all  His 
words,  evcsn  in  the  simplest  of  them  ;  and  there  are 
passages  in  His  discourses  in  which  He  assumes 
prerogatives  and  powers  such  as  no  prophet  had 
ever  claimed  before.  He  forgives  the  sins  of  men. 
He  calls  to  Himself  all  that  labour  and  are  heavy- 
laden,  and  promises  that  He  will  give  them  rest. 
He  declares  that  where  two  or  three  are  gathered 
together  in   His  name,  He  is   in   the  midst  of  them  ; 


6o  THE  DIRECT  APPEAL  OF  CHRIST 

reminding  us  of  the  great  Jewish  saying,  which  was 
perhaps  ah'cady  current  in  our  Lord's  time,  that 
where  two  of  the  devout  sons  of  Abraham  are  study- 
ing the  Divine  hiw  together,  tJicre  is  the  Sliechinah,  the 
glory  which  is  an  assurance  of  the  presence  of  the 
God  of  Israel.  He  is  the  Shepherd  of  the  flock  of 
God,  whether  they  are  in  the  Jewiali  fold,  or  scattered 
over  the  great  waste  and  wilderness  of  heathenism  ; 
He  has  come  to  lay  down  His  life  for  the  sheep,  and 
they  are  to  become  one  flock  under  one  Shepherd. 
To  all  that  listen  to  His  voice  and  follow  Him  He 
gives  eternal  life  ;  and  He  says  that  they  shall  "never 
perish,  and  no  one  shall  snatch  them  out  of  My 
hands."  The  life  which  He  gives  is  not  given  once 
for  all  ;  those  who  receive  it  are  continuously  depen- 
dent upon  Him  ;  "  apart  "  from  Him  they  wither  and 
die,  like  the  branches  apart  from  the  vine.  He 
Himself  is  "the  Way,  the  Trutli,  and  the  Life"; 
"no  one  cometh  to  the  Father"  but  by  Him.  He  is 
in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  is  in  Him.  To  have 
seen  Him  is  to  have  seen  the  Father.  He  will  pray 
the  Father,  and  the  Father  will  send  His  disciples 
another  Comforter  —  a  Divine  Person- — to  teach, 
strengthen,  and  defend  them.  He  Himself  will  send 
the  Comforter,  and  the  Comforter  will  glorify  Him. 
He  associates  Himself  with  the  Ftcrnal :  "  He  that 
loveth  Me  shall  be  loved  of  My  Father  ;  and  I  will 
love  him,  and  will  manifest  Myself  unto  him.  .  .  . 
My  Father  will  love  him,  and  We  will  come  to  him, 
and   make  Our   abode  with  him."      He   is  to  die,  but 


TO    THE  SPIRIT  OF  MAN.  6l 

His  blood  is  to  be  "  shed  for  many  unto  remission 
of  sins."  As  for  Himself,  He  has  no  sins  that  need 
remission. 

He  is  man — really  man  ;  but  He  is  not  as  other 
men.  He  is  tempted  ;  but  the  temptations  which 
assail  Him  are  such  as  might  well  assail  the  Son 
of  the  Eternal  who  had  been  "made  flesh";  their 
appeal  is  to  One  whose  personality  is  unique,  and 
who  is  destined  to  unique  sorrows  and  to  unique 
greatness.  He  prays  ;  but  He  does  not  pray  with 
His  friends,  though  sometimes  He  prays  in  their 
presence,  and  they  hear  the  great  words  which  He 
addresses  to  His  Father.  They  are  words  which, 
while  they  imply  the  humblest  submission  and  the 
complctest  dependence,  imply  also  a  freedom  of 
access  to  God,  resting  on  community  of  life  and  com- 
munity of  dignity,  such  as  can  belong  to  none  but 
Himself  They  express  at  once  the  reality  of  His 
eternal  union  with  the  Father,  and  the  reality  of  His 
acceptance  of  all  the  conditions  of  humanity.^ 

The  story  transcends  invention  ;  it  must  be  true. 
And  this  is  the  very  Christ  whom  we  know  for  our- 
selves, the  Christ  who  has  been  known  to  Christian 
men  for  sixty  generations. 


'  The  argument  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  is  admirably 
stated  and  ilkistrated  in  the  Hulsean  Lectures  for  1S56  by 
Dr.  Harvey  Goodwin  :  The  Glory  of  tJie  Only  Bcgotlcn  of  the 
Father  secti  in  the  Manhood  of  Christ. 


LECTURE   IV. 

REPLY  TO   CRITICISMS  ON  THE  PRECEDING 
LECTURES. 

THIS  morning  I  propose  to  discuss  some  con- 
siderations which  may  appear  to  invalidate 
certain  positions  maintained  in  the  preceding  Lec- 
tures, and  then  to  inquire  to  what  extent  the 
conclusions  which  we  have  reached  support  the 
historical  trustworthiness  of  the  Four  Gospels. 

You  will  remember  that  the  substance  of  the  first 
answer  which  I  have  given  to  the  question,  Why  is 
it  that  those  of  us  who  believe  in  Christ  have  con- 
tinued to  believe  in  Him,  in  the  presence  of  the 
strong  and  persistent  assaults  which  have  been  made 
from  many  quarters  on  the  authority  of  the  Christian 
Scriptures  ?  is  this  :  Whatever  may  have  been  the 
original  grounds  of  our  faith  in  Christ,  our  faith  has 
been  verified,  and  verified  in  many  wa}'s,  in  our  own 
personal  experience.  Our  case  is  the  case  of  Barti- 
ma:us,  the  blind  beggar  of  Jericho.  His  original 
reasons  for  believing  in  the  miraculous  power  of  the 
Prophet  of  Nazareth  may  have  been  inadequate  ;  he 


REPLY  TO  CRITICISMS.  63 


may  have  had  nothing  more  to  go  upon  than  the 
story  of  a  passing  stranger  about  a  bHnd  man  in 
Jerusalem,  whose  eyes  Jesus  had  anointed  with  clay, 
and  who,  after  he  had  been  sent  to  wash  in  the  Pool 
of  Siloam,  came  back  to  the  city  seeing  ;  the  stranger 
himself  might  not  have  seen  the  miracle  ;  he  might 
only  have  heard  the  report  of  it  ;  or,  if  he  professed 
to  have  seen  it,  Rartimceus  may  have  had  no  proof 
that  he  was  an  honest  man,  and  that  his  word  was 
to  be  trusted  :  but  as  soon  as  Bartimseus  himself  had 
received  sight,  no  doubts,  however  grave,  about  the 
truth  of  the  stranger's  story  would  disturb  his  cer- 
tainty that  our  Lord  could  work  miracles.  His 
original  faith  may  have  rested  on  c\^idence  which 
subsequent  reflection  and  inquiry  showed  to  be  un- 
satisfactory ;  but  as  soon  as  he  himself  saw  the  faces 
of  his  friends,  and  the  streets  and  houses  in  the  city 
of  Jericho,  and  the  waters  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  the 
mountains  of  Moab  standing  like  a  great  wall  against 
the  splendour  of  the  clear,  blue  sky,  his  faith  rested 
on  immovable  foundations  of  personal  experience. 
And  so  the  original  faith  of  Christian  people  may 
have  rested,  or  may  have  seemed  to  rest,  on  tradition, 
on  the  testimony  of  friends  to  the  grace  of  Christ  and 
the  glory  of  the  Christian  redemption,  on  a  belief  in 
the  inspiration  and  authority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
They  may  discover  that  to  build  their  faith  on  tradi- 
tion is  to  build  on  the  sand  ;  after  the  lapse  of  years, 
the  testimony  of  friends  which  at  first  so  strongly 
impressed    them    may  no  longer  retain  its  freshness 


64  REPLY  TO   CRITICISMS 

and  power,  and  they  may  wonder  that  it  should  ever 
have  had  such  decisive  force ;  they  may  become 
familiar  with  the  controversies  concerning  the  authen- 
ticity and  genuineness  of  the  Four  Gospels,  and  con- 
cerning the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  generally, 
and  they  may  be  unable  to  see  their  way  to  any  firm 
conclusions  on  some  of  the  principal  questions  at 
issue.  The  original  grounds  of  their  faith — or  w^hat 
they  supposed  to  be  the  original  grounds  of  their 
faith — have  vanished.  But  their  faith  in  Christ  is 
firmer  than  ever ;  for  they  know  from  their  own 
personal  experience  that  the  Living  Christ  is  the  way 
to  the  Father,  the  Lord  and  the  Saviour  of  men. 

L 

.  /  It  may  be  objected  that  the  adherents  of  false 
religions  can  make  the  same  appeal  to  experience  in 
verification  of  their  faith,  and  that  therefore  the 
argument  from  experience  cannot  be  valid.  It  has 
been  suggested  to  me  that  a  devout  Mahometan,  for 
example,  may  be  certain  that  his  experience  confirms 
the  Divine  mission  of  Mahomet,  just  as  a  devout 
Christian  is  certain  that  his  experience  confirms  the 
Divine  mission  of  Christ. 

It  might  not,  perhaps,  be  wholly  unreasonable  to 
reply  that  very  few  of  us  know  anything  about  the 
religious  experience  of  devout  Mahometans ;  that 
the  objection  rests  on  \\'hat  we  imagine  to  be  the 
experience  of  men  of  other  races  living  in  distant 
lands,  and  that  it   is  alleged  against  what  we  knoiv 


ON  THE  PRECEDING  LECTURES.  65 

to  be  the  actual  experience  of  our  own  countrymen. 
But  I  am  anxious  to  attribute  the  largest  conceivable 
weight  to  the  objection  ;  the  consideration  of  it  will 
give  additional  clearness  to  the  real  nature  of  the 
Christian  argument. 

What  is  it  then  that  the  experience  of  a  devout 
Mahometan  verifies  ?  Does  it  verify  anything  more 
than  the  truth  explicitly  or  implicitly  contained  in 
Mahomet's  great  message :  that  there  is  one  God, 
awful  in  His  greatness,  ^\■hose  will  is  supreme, 
whose  poucr  is  too  mighty  for  heaven  or  earth  to 
resist,  who  is  the  strong  Defender  and  eternal  Friend 
of  the  faithful,  and  In  whom  men  may  find  strength 
and  courage  and  peace  ?  This  conception  of  God, 
thougli  inadequate,  is  true  as  far  as  it  goes.  The 
devout  Mahometan  v/ould  be  wholly  in  the  right  in 
maintaining  that  his  experience  confirmed  his  faith 
in  the  unity  and  awful  greatness  of  God,  and  was  an 
adequate  reason  for  holding  fast  to  it  in  the  presence 
of  the  idolatries  of  heathen  races,  and  of  the  de- 
generacy and  superstitions  of  those  Christian  nations 
in  which  he  could  find  no  real  and  living  sense  of 
the  august  supremacy  and  the  power  and  glory  of 
the  Eternal. 

But  from  experience  he  can  learn  nothing  about 
Mahomet.  All  that  his  experience  verifies  is  the 
truth  of  a  part  of  Mahomet's  message.  He  may  infer 
that  the  man  who  delivered  so  great  a  message,  with 
such  power  and  effect,  must  have  been  sent  of  God 
to  deliver  it ;  and   I   should   not  care  to  dispute  the 

L.  C.  5 


C6  REPLY  TO   CRITICISMS 

inference.  If  he  went  on  to  infer,  and  to  require  mc 
to  admit,  that  everything  that  Mahomet  taught — 
what  he  taught,  for  example,  about  the  sensuous  joys 
to  which  the  faithful  arc  destined  in  paradise — is  also 
true,  and  is  to  be  received  as  part  of  a  message  from 
heaven,  I  should  raise  an  objection.  I  should  say  : 
*'  What  you  have  verified  in  your  own  experience  you 
are  bound  to  hold  as  true  ;  but  that  Mahomet  taught 
some  great  truths  is  no  proof  that  he  did  not  teach 
some  serious  errors.  The  truth  of  those  parts  of  his 
teaching  which  you  have  verified  does  not  compel 
you  to  regard  as  true  those  parts  of  his  teaching 
which,  from  their  very  nature,  are  as  yet  incapable  of 
verification.  This  unverified  teaching  rests  on  Maho- 
met's authority;  and  there  is  nothing  in  your  personal 
experience  which  can  assure  you  of  either  the  nature 
or  the  limits  of  that  authority." 

So  much  for  what  I  might  say  to  a  devout 
Mahometan ;  I  prefer  to  finish  the  discussion  by 
addressing,  not  an  imaginary  Mahometan  in  Cairo, 
Constantinople,  or  Damascus,  but  yourselves. 

The  objection  rests  upon  a  false  assumption.  It 
assumes  that  what  may  be  verified  in  the  experience 
of  a  devout  Mahometan  corresponds  to  what  may  be 
verified  in  the  experience  of  a  devout  Christian.  But, 
as  I  have  said,  what  the  Mahometan  can  verify  is 
sim[)ly  the  truth  of  a  part  of  Mahomet's  message, 
which  was  delivered  twelve  centuries  and  a  half  ago. 
What  the  Christian  verifies  is  the  present  power  and 
grace   of  Jesus  Christ    Himself     The    truth   verified 


ON  THE  PRECEDING  LECTURES.  67 


by  the  Mahometan  has  only  an  extrinsic  and  acci- 
dental relation  to  Mahomet.  It  would  be  an  august 
truth,  whoever  had  first  proclaimed  it  to  the  people 
of  Arabia  ;  it  is  an  august  truth,  whatever  errors 
may  have  been  associated  with  it  in  the  teaching  of 
the  great  man  who  actually  proclaimed  it.  But  the 
Christian  Gospel,  verified  by  the  Christian,  is  not 
merely  a  truth  or  a  body  of  truths  first  taught  by 
Christ :  it  is  a  truth,  a  body  of  truths,  concerning 
Christ  Himself;  in  its  very  essence  and  substance  it 
is  related  to  Christ.  Mahomet  delivered  his  mes- 
sage ;  men  received  it ;  and  from  that  time  the  truth 
which  it  contained  was  a  great,  living  force  in  the 
world  ;  and  it  is  this  truth  which  is  verified  in  the 
experience  of  devout  Mahometans  :  of  Mahomet 
himself  they  have  no  experience.  But  Christ — not 
the  truth  which  He  taught,  apart  from  Himself — 
Christ  Himself  is  the  effective  Saviour  of  men  in 
every  country  and  in  every  age  ;  and  what  is  verified 
in  Christian  experience  is  that  Christ  Himself  gives 
eternal  life,  quenches  or  subdues  evil  passions,  and 
is  the  strength  of  all  Christian  righteousness  ;  Chris- 
tian men  are  conscious  that,  in  the  power,  not  of  the 
truth  which  He  taught,  but  of  personal  union  with 
Himself,  they  have  their  place  in  the  eternal  order 
and  know  the  blessedness  of  fellowship  with  God 
The  devout  Mahometan  may  infer,  from  his  expe- 
rience of  the  truth  of  Mahomet's  message  concerning 
the  unity  and  awful  greatness  of  the  Eternal,  that 
Mahomet,  who    has   been    dead  for    twelve    hundred 


6S  REPLY  TO   CRITICISMS 

years,  was  a  prophet  sent  from  God  ;  within  what 
Hmits,  and  with  what  qualifications,  the  inference  is 
vaHd,  is  a  question  for  discussion.  The  devout  Chris- 
tian has  an  immediate  knowledge  of  the  Living"  Christ 
as  the  Saviour  of  men.  This  is  not  an  inference  from 
experience  ;  it  is  given  in  experience. 

f^  It  has  also  been  objected,  that  the  adherents  of  cor- 
rupt forms  of  Christianity  may  appeal  to  experience 
as  verif}'ing,  not  only  the  general  substance  of  the 
Christian  Gospel,  but  specific  corruptions  of  it ;  and 
that  therefore  the  appeal  to  experience  is  not  decisive. 
For  example,  it  is  alleged  that  a  superstitious  Catholic 
who  has  committed  murder,  and  who  is  tortured  with 
a  sense  of  guilt,  may  confess  his  crime  to  a  priest, 
and  leave  the  confessional  with  a  light  heart  ;  to  him, 
therefore,  it  is  certain  that  the  priest  has  authority  to 
absolve  him  from  his  crime.  But  this,  again^  is  an 
imaginary  experience  brought  forward  to  invalidate 
the  force  of  an  experience  that  is  real.  We  Pro- 
testants know  very  little  about  Catholic  criminals,  or 
about  the  peace  of  heart  which  is  given  them  by 
absolution. 

But  let  us  construct  our  case.  We  are  to  suppose 
that  the  criminal  is  oppressed  with  a  horror  of  his 
guilt  ;  that  he  is  not  merely  dreading  the  flames  of 
hell.  His  conscience  is  inflicting  on  him  intolerable 
torture  ;  it  is  the  past  crime  which  is  the  haunting, 
agonising  terror,  not  the  future  penalty  which  may 
come  upon  him  for  having  committed   it.     And   we 


ON'  THE  rKECEDING  LECTURES.  6) 

arc  to  suppose  that,  after  receiving  absolution  from 
the  priest,  he  is  Hberated  from  the  sense  of  guilt,  and 
liberated  completely  ;  his  freedom  is  as  buoyant  as 
that  which,  according  to  our  experience,  comes  in 
answer  to  our  trust  in  the  redemption  and  the  infinite 
grace  of  Christ.     This  is  the  imaginary  case. 

But  could  this  be  a  real  case  ?  Could  it  be  a  com- 
plete account  of  a  real  case  ?  An  imaginary  criminal 
who  has  received  from  an  imaginary  absolution  an 
imaginary  release  from  the  sense  of  guilt  cannot  be 
examined  ;  his  experience  cannot  be  tested.  But  if 
I  met  a  murderer  coming  out  of  a  Catholic  church 
with  a  face  in  which  I  could  see  peace  and  hope  and 
thankfulness,  I  should  like  to  ask  him  a  few  questions. 
When  he  confessed  his  sin,  did  the  priest  remind  him 
that  Christ  had  died  for  the  sins  of  men  ?  Did  he 
himself  recall  that  gracious,  that  awful  form,  extended 
on  the  cross,  before  which  he  had  been  accustomed, 
from  his  childhood,  to  bow  with  penitence  and 
worship  ?  Did  he  pass  in  thought  from  the  crucifix 
to  Christ — Son  of  God,  Son  of  man,  sacrifice  for  the 
sin  of  the  world  ?  Did  the  priest  pronounce  the 
words  of  absolution  in  his  own  name  or  in  Christ's 
name?  Was  it  in  the  authority  and  grace  of  the 
priest  that  he  found  rest  of  heart,  or  in  the  authority 
and  grace  of  Christ,  for  whom,  as  he  believed,  the  priest 
spoke?  If  the  priest  was  but  the  channel  of  the 
mercy  and  power  of  Christ,  then  the  man's  experience 
does  not  contradict,  but  confirm  mine  ;  it  was  from 
Christ  that  he  received  release,  and  to  Christ,  not  to 


REPLY  TO   CRITICISMS 


the  priest,  he  would  say'  witli  a  grateful  heart,  "  As 
far  as  the  east  is  from  the  west,  so  far  hast  Thou 
removed  my  transgressions  from  me."  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  is  supposed  that  the  criminal  did  not 
pass  be}'ond  the  priest  to  Christ,  I  should  deny  that 
the  imaginary  case  could  ever  be  a  real  one. 

II. 

An  objection  of  another  kind  may  be  taken  to  the 
line  of  argument  in  the  preceding  Lectures.  It  may 
be  said  that,  if  Christian  men  were  asked  why  they 
believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the}'  would  not  give 
either  of  the  answers  which  I  have  given  for  them. 
Nine  out  of  ten  would  reply  that  they  believe  in 
Christ  because  they  believe  that  the  whole  Bible,  from 
the  first  chapter  in  the  book  of  Genesis  to  the  last 
chapter  in  the  book  of  the  Revelation,  was  inspired 
by  God,  and  that  every  sentence  is  covered  by  His 
authority.  Or  they  would  say  that  they  believe  that 
the  Four  Gospels  were  written  by  men  whose  word 
can  be  trusted  ;  that  the  miracles  attributed  to  Christ 
were  really  wrought  by  Him  ;  that  the  miracles 
establish  His  claim  to  be  the  Son  of  God  and 
Saviour  of  the  world  ;  and  that  therefore  they  trust 
in  Him  for  salvation.  They  would  acknowledge  with 
gratitude  that  they  have  the  kind  of  experience  which 
I  have  described,  and  that  they  see  for  themselves 
the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord  ;  but  would  say — some  of  them — that  their 
faith  would  perish  if  they  began  to  doubt  the  Divine 


ON  THE   FRECEDING  LECTURES.  71 


authority  of  any  book,  or  any  part  of  any  book,  in 
the  Old  Testament  or  the  New ;  others,  that  their 
faith  woukl  perish  if  they  began  to  doubt  whether 
the  Four  Gospels  were  written  by  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  and  John. 

I  think  it  very  probable  that  a  large  majority  of 
Christian  men  in  this  country  would  give  one  or 
other  of  these  answers,  and  would  commit  themselves 
to  one  or  other  of  these  contentions.  But  it  is  very 
certain  that  very  many  of  those  who  have  the  firmest 
belief  in  the  inspiration  and  authority  of  all  the  books 
contained  in  that  wonderful  library  of  Jewish  and 
early  Christian  writings  which  we  call  the  Bible  have 
never  seriously  examined  the  grounds  of  their  belief. 
They  are  sure  that  the  books  are  inspired,  but,  apart 
from  their  own  experience  of  the  spiritual  force  of  the 
books,  they  can  produce  no  reasons  for  believing  in 
their  inspiration  ;  their  belief,  as  far  as  it  is  anything 
more  than  an  inheritance  from  the  traditions  of  the 
Christian  Church,  is  an  inference  from  experience. 

And  it  is  equally  certain  that  very  many  of  those 
who  have  the  strongest  confidence  in  the  historical 
trustworthiness  of  the  Four  Gospels  have  never  in- 
vestigated the  grounds  on  which  they  believe  that 
"  there  is  satisfactory  evidence,"  to  use  the  conve- 
nient words  of  Paley,  "  that  many,  professing  to  be 
original  witnesses  of  the  Christian  miracles,  passed 
their  lives  in  labours,  dangers,  and  sufferings,  volun- 
tarily undergone  in  attestation  of  the  accounts  which 
they   delivered,   and  solely  in    consequence  of  their 


EEPLY  TO   CRITICISMS 


belief  in  those  accounts  ;  and  that  they  also  sub- 
mitted, from  the  same  motives,  to  new  rules  of  con- 
duct." Nor  have  they  ever  passed  on  to  inquire 
"  whether  the  account  which  our  Scriptures  contain 
be  that  story,  that  which  these  men  delivered,  and 
for  which  they  acted  and  suffered  as  they  did."  They 
would  vehemently  den)'  that  their  faith  in  Christ 
rested  cither  on  the  authority  of  scholars  or  on  tra- 
dition. They  would  insist  that  they  have  a  personal 
certainty,  which  no  assaults  can  shake,  that  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  mankind.  But 
as  they  have  never  investigated  for  themselves  the 
historical  argument  for  the  genuineness  and  authen- 
ticity of  the  Four  Gospels,  their  certainty  cannot 
really  rest  on  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the 
New  Testament  story. 

The  real  grounds  of  a  man's  belief,  like  the  real 
motives  of  a  man's  conduct,  are  not  always  known 
to  himself.  Let  me  illustrate  what  I  mean.  I  know 
a  Nonconformist  chapel,  in  which  what  may  be  de- 
scribed as  a  shallow,  semi-elliptical  apse  behind  the 
platform  on  which  the  preacher  stands  is  screened 
off  from  the  rest  of  the  building  by  a  row  of  Ionic 
columns,  supporting,  or  apparently  supporting,  a 
massive  architrave.  A  few  years  ago  it  became 
necessary  to  break  through  the  screen,  in  order  to 
place  part  of  the  organ  in  the  apse.  This  innovation 
threatened  the  destruction  of  some  of  those  stately 
columns,  which  were  the  pride  and  admiration  of  the 
men  by  v.hom   the  chapel  was  built  ;  but  the  cata- 


ON   THE   PRECEDING  LECTURES. 


strophe  was  averted.  All  the  space  that  was  neces- 
sary for  the  organ  was  obtained  by  cutting  away  the 
lower  half  of  the  two  central  columns — they  looked 
as  if  they  were  stone,  they  were  really  of  wood — and 
leaving  their  two  capitals  with  eight  or  ten  feet  of 
each  of  the  shafts  suspended  to  the  architrave  which 
they  appeared  to  support.  The  columns  had  never 
supported  what  they  seemed  to  support  ;  the  archi- 
trave had  always  been  kept  in  its  place  by  other 
means.  That  the  lower  half  of  the  shaft  of  two  of 
them  has  been  removed  is  now  concealed  by  the 
organ  and  its  case.  The  columns  are  as  important 
and  stately  as  ever  ;  they  still  seem  to  bear  up  a 
great  weight,  but  two  of  them  are  hanging  on  to  the 
architrave  instead  of  supporting  it.  This  is  bad 
architecture  ;  but  something  very  like  it  may  be  seen 
in  the  architecture  of  human  opinions  and  beliefs. 
The  pillars  —  apparently  of  solid  marble,  really  of 
worm-eaten  wood — on  which  we  imagine  that  some 
of  our  most  important  convictions  rest,  might  be 
removed,  and  the  convictions  would  remain  firm  and 
unmoved  ;  they  really  rest  on  quite  other  supports — 
supports  which  are  not  apparent  to  the  eye,  and 
which  we  have  never  had  the  penetration  to  discover. 
The  elaborate  reasons,  the  formal  demonstrations, 
which  tlic  intellect  regards  with  pride  as  a  row  of 
stately  columns  upholding  its  faith,  arc  suspended 
from  the  faith  which  is  supposed  to  rest  upon  them. 
Cut  through  the  columns  half-way  between  base  and 
capital,   and    the   faith   is    undisturbed  ;    but    let    the 


74  REPLY  TO    CRITICISMS 

strength  of  the  faith  itself  be  impaired,  and  then  the 
reasons  and  demonstrations  fall  into  ruins. 

In  common  life  it  is  not  unusual  to  find  men  who 
have  a  sound,  practical  judgment,  but  who  can  give 
only  a  very  poor  account  of  the  considerations  which 
have  determined  their  judgment.  We  trust  them 
till  they  begin  to  explain.  Their  conclusions  are 
sagacious  ;  their  reasons  are  worthless.  The  truth 
is  that  they  reached  their  conclusions  by  a  path 
which  they  cannot  trace ;  their  "  reasons "  are  an 
after-thought ;  they  are  not  the  reasons  which  really 
guided  them.  Men  of  this  kind  have  an  under- 
standing naturally  strong  and  penetrating,  and  their 
fairness  and  self-control  have  prevented  them  from 
injuring  an  excellent  instrument  by  rough  usage. 
They  have  had  an  experience  of  affairs  which  in- 
fluences them  without  their  knowledge.  Their 
experience  has  trained  them — not  taught  them — to 
be  courageous  at  the  right  time  and  to  be  cautious 
at  the  right  time,  to  be  trustful  and  suspicious  with 
the  right  men.  And  so  their  judgments  are  right. 
But  the  intellectual  processes  by  which  their  judg- 
ments are  determined  are  of  an  automatic  kind,  and 
are  too  swift  and  too  subtle  to  be  recognised  at  the 
time,  or  to  be  discovered  afterwards  by  a  mind  not 
accustomed  to  introspection  ;  the  ethical  factors 
which  assisted  to  give  form  and  substance  to  the 
conclusion  are  likely  to  be  wholly  disregarded.^ 

'  Sec  a  remarkable  sermon  on  "  Explicit  nnd  Implicit  Reason  " 


ON  THE  PRECEDING  LECTURES.  75 

It  need  not  surprise  us  therefore  if  Christian  men 
sometimes  give  very  inadequate  reasons  for  believing 
in  Christ.  It  does  not  follow  that  their  belief  has  no 
solid  foundations,  or  that  you  can  destroy  their  belief 
by  destroying  the  reasons  which  they  allege  for  it. 
These  may  not  be  the  real  reasons.  Indeed,  as  I 
have  said,  the  reasons  which  are  supposed  to  be  the 
support  of  faith  are  often  supported  by  it.  Men 
think  that  they  believe  in  Christ  because  they  believe 
in  the  Bible  ;  they  really  believe  in  the  Bible  because 
they  believe  in  Christ.  They  think  that  their  Chris- 
tian faith  rests  on  their  belief  in  the  historical  trust- 
worthiness of  the  Four  Gospels  ;  their  belief  in  the 
historical  trustworthiness  of  the  Four  Gospels  really 
rests  on  their  Christian  faith.  They  know  Christ  for 
themselves  ;  in  the  Gospels  they  recognise  the  Christ 
whom  they  know  ;  and  therefore  they  believe  that 
the  Gospels  are  trustworth)'. 

III. 

The  question,  Whether  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  is  an  adequate  ground  for  belief  in  the  inspira- 
tion and  authority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  opens  wide 
discussions,  into  which  it  is  no  part  of  my  intention 
to  enter.  But  the  question.  Whether  faith  in  Christ 
is  an  adequate  ground  for  believing  in  the  historical 
trustworthiness  of  the  Four  Gospels,  lies  immediately 
in  our  way  ;  for  the  historical   trustworthiness  of  the 

in  Sermons  chiejly  on  the  Theory  of  Religious  Belief.     Cy  John 
Henry  Newman  (1843). 


KErL\    TO   CRITICISMS 


Four  Gospels  will  be  the  subject  of  the  future  Lectures 
of  this  course. 

You  will  remember  that  I  have  said  that  in  the 
Christ  of  the  Four  Gospels  Christian  men  see  for 
themselves  the  very  glory  of  God.  They  know  Him 
He  is  the  Christ  in  whom  their  life  is  rooted,  the 
Christ  who  has  liberated  them  from  the  sense  of  guilt, 
broken  or  loosened  the  chains  of  their  evil  habits, 
extinguished  or  subdued  the  fire  of  their  evil  passions, 
given  them  all  the  strength  they  have  ever  had  for 
righteous  living.  They  recognise  flis  voice,  His  tone. 
His  accent.  His  words  in  the  printed  book — words 
spoken  more  than  eighteen  hundred  }'ears  ago — some- 
times come  to  them  as  if  they  were  fresh  from  His 
lips  ;  they  could  not  have  been  spoken  by  any  one 
but  Him.  The  Christ  of  the  Gospels  knows  their 
innermost  heart  as  the  Living  Christ  knows  it.  He 
has  the  same  unique  tenderness  and  the  same 
severity,  the  same  majesty  and  the  same  gentleness. 
It  is  in  the  power  of  that  very  communion  between 
Christ  Himself  and  the  Father  which  is  illustrated  in 
the  Christ  of  the  Gospels  that  they  themselves  find 
God. 

What  is  the  legitimate  inference  from  these  great 
experiences?  Do  they  authenticate  the  historical 
trustworthiness  of  the  four  narratives  of  our  Lord's 
earthly  life  contained  in  the  New  Testament?  Do 
they  render  unnecessary  all  critical  inquiries  ?  Do 
they  close  all  discussion  concerning  the  dates  and  the 
authorship  of  the  several  narratives? 


ON   THE  RECEDING  LECTURES. 


That  these  experiences  authenticate  the  substantial 
truth  of  the  Four  Gospels  is  obvious.  To  those  who 
see  the  glory  of  God  in  the  Christ  of  the  Gospels, 
and  who  recognise  in  Ilim  the  Christ  they  know  for 
themselves,  and  who  is  the  Lord,  the  strength,  the 
joy,  the  glory  of  their  life,  doubt  concerning  the 
substantial  truth  of  the  Gospels  is  impossible.  But 
their  substantial  truth  does  not  necessarily  carry  with 
it  the  certainty  that  they  were  written  by  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  or  even  that  they  were  written 
before  the  first  generation  of  Christians  had  passed 
away.  There  may  be  —  there  are  —  very  decisive 
proofs  of  another  kind  that  the  men  who  wrote  them 
belonged  to  that  generation  ;  but  the  substantial 
truth  of  the  narratives,  as  accounts  of  what  was  said 
and  done  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  is  not  inconsis- 
tent with  the  theory  that  they  were  the  product  of  a 
later  age.  For  it  is  conceivable  that  a  personality  so 
powerful  and  so- unique  as  that  of  Christ  might  have 
impressed  itself  with  such  force  upon  the  first  genera- 
tion of  His  disciples,  that  they  transmitted  to  their 
immediate  successors  a  conception  of  Him  as  strong 
and  as  definite  as  their  own,  and  that  by  these  in 
turn  it  was  transmitted  to  a  third  generation.  In 
His  whole  character  and  spirit,  in  His  relations  both 
to  God  and  to  man,  there  was  something  so  fresh  and 
so  original,  that  even  if  His  earthly  friends  had  left  no 
written  documents  preserving  their  exact  knowledge 
of  His  earthly  history,  the  tradition  of  it  could  hardly 
have  been  corrupted  by  alien  elements  till  a  long  time 


7S  REPLY  TO    CRITICISMS 

after  those  who  had  known  Him  in  Galilee  and  in 
Jerusalem  had  passed  away.  His  teaching  also  was 
so  different,  both  in  substance  and  in  manner,  from 
all  other  teaching,  that  even  the  tradition  of  it  would 
naturally  and  forcibly  reject  all  foreign  accretions. 
We  know  that  before  the  third  Gospel  was  written 
"  many  had  "  taken  in  hand  to  draw  up  accounts  of 
the  earthly  life  and  ministry  of  our  Lord  ;  and  as 
these  narratives  contained  what  had  been  "  delivered  " 
to  the  second  generation  of  Christians  by  those  who 
"  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers 
of  the  word,"  there  were  written  materials  of  the 
highest  authenticity,  which  might  have  been  used  by 
writers  of  the  third  or  fourth  generation  of  Christians. 
Accounts  drawn  from  such  sources  would  have  that 
substantial  truth  which  Christian  men  recognise  for 
themselves  in  the  story  of  the  Four  Gospels. 

We  may  see  for  ourselves  the  glory  of  God  in  the 
historic  Christ  of  the  New  Testament  ;  we  may  be 
certain  that  that  gracious,  pathetic.  Divine  Persona- 
lity was  not  created  by  any  human  imagination  ;  in 
that  historic  Christ  we  may  recognise  the  living  and 
glorified  Christ,  through  whom  we  ourselves  have 
received  eternal  redemption  :  and  yet  we  may  have 
to  inquire  in  what  age  and  by  what  persons  the  Four 
Gospels  were  written.  Their  substantial  truth  is  not, 
in  itself  and  apart  from  all  other  considerations,  a 
final  proof  that  they  were  \\ritten  by  Matthew,  Mark-, 
Luke,  and  John. 

Uncertainty  with  regard   to  the  authorship  of  the 


Oy   THE  PRECEDING  LECTURES. 


Four  Gospels,  uncertainty  with  regard  to  the  dates 
at  which  they  were  written,  is  not  to  be  regarded 
as  the  sign  of  faltering  faith  in  Christ.  Questions 
of  literature  should  be  distinguished  from  questions 
of  faith.  Many  great  scholars  are  sure  that  the 
Gospels  were  written  by  the  men  to  whom  they 
are  attributed  ;  but  the  acceptance  of  the  conclusions 
of  great  scholars  concerning  the  authorship  of  certain 
wonderful  books  is  not  one  of  the  conditions  of 
eternal  salvation  ;  it  is  something  wholly  different 
from  faith  in  Christ :  nor  is  it  conceivable  that  a 
confidence  in  the  learning  and  judgment  of  the  most 
eminent  of  scholars  is  a  condition  precedent  of  faith 
in  Him.  The  tradition  of  the  Church  declares  that 
we  owe  the  story  of  Christ  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke, 
and  John  ;  but  faith  in  Christ  as  the'  Son  of  God  and 
the  Saviour  and  Lord  of  men,  is  something  wholly 
different  from  a  conviction  that  it  is  impossible  for 
the  tradition  of  the  Church  about  the  authorship  of 
the  I'our  Gospels  to  be  erroneous. 

Very  few  of  us  have  investigated  for  ourselves  the 
grounds  of  the  prevalent  and  ancient  belief  con- 
cerning the  authorship  of  these  sacred  books  ;  wc 
have  accepted  the  tradition  ;  we  have  been  satisfied 
with  the  judgment  of  great  orthodox  scholars  ;  but 
there  is  no  want  of  religious  faith  in  questioning,  in 
doubting  whether,  after  all,  the  tradition  is  absolutely 
trustworthy,  or  whether  the  judgment  of  scholars — 
even  the  greatest  and  most  orthodox — is  infallible. 


So  REPLY  TO   CRITICISMS 

Religious  doubt  is  of  another  kind,  and  relates  to 
other  objects.  Its  roots  are  in  the  moral  and  spiritual 
life,  not  in  the  intellect.  It  has  to  do  with  the  power 
and  grace  and  glory  of  Christ,  not  with  the  conclu- 
sions of  scholars  or  with  the  tradition  of  the  Church. 
Do  not  be  greatly  troubled  if,  in  conversation  with  a 
friend,  or  while  reading  an  article  in  a  review,  you 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  argument  for  the 
early  date  of  the  Four  Gospels  is  not  so  decisive  as 
you  had  supposed.  Do  not  imagine  that  your  sense 
of  uncertainty  on  a  question  of  this  description  is  any 
sign  that  your  Christian  faith  is  giving  way. 

But  if,  when  it  begins  to  appear  possible  that  the 
traditional  belief  of  the  Church  concerning  the 
authorship  of  the  Four  Gospels  may,  after  all,  be 
erroneous,  you  arc  conscious — however  faintly — of 
a  certain  sense  of  relief;  if,  with  the  intellectual 
doubt,  you  are  conscious  of  any  relaxation  of  the 
claims  of  Christ  upon  your  loyal  devotion  and  your 
unreserved  obedience  ;  and  if  the  relaxation  is  wel- 
comed rather  than  dreaded  :  then  you  have  reason 
for  alarm.  Or  if,  when  the  intellectual  doubt  begins 
to  fasten  itself  upon  you,  )-ou  can  discover  that  }'0U 
have  been  gradually  losing  the  moral  and  spiritual 
sense  of  your  own  need  of  the  Christian  redemption  ; 
or  that,  perhaps,  as  the  result  of  causes  which  you 
can  trace,  and  for  which  you  are  responsible,  your 
consciousness  of  the  reality  of  that  redemption  is 
less  vivid  than  it  once  was  ;  if  your  thirst  for  the 
Living  God  has  been  less  urgent ;  if  the  satisfaction 


ON  THE  PRECEDING  LECTURES.  8i 

of  that  thirst  has  been  less  refreshing  and  animating  ; 
then  there  are  grave  reasons  for  anxiety.  The  intel- 
lectual doubt  which  is  an  assailant  from  the  outside 
has  its  confederates  in  the  very  citadel  of  your  moral 
and  spiritual  life.  When  faith  has  been  surrendered, 
you  may  imagine  that  you  have  had  no  choice,  that 
your  intellectual  integrity  forced  you  to  abandon  it ; 
and  yet  the  surrender  might  never  have  been  made 
but  for  the  treachery  of  internal  foes. 


L.  f 


LECTURE   V. 

THE  HISTORICAL  TRUSTWORTHINESS  OF  THE 
STORY  CONTAINED  IN  THE  FOUR  COS- 
PELS:  HOW  SHOULD  THE  EVIDENCE  BE 
APPROACHED? 

IX  the  preceding  Lectures  I  have  endeavoured  to 
explain  how  it  is  that  the  faith  of  the  majority  of 
Christian  people  has  not  been  shaken  by  the  storm 
of  criticism  which,  during  the  whole  lifetime  of  the 
present  generation,  has  been  beating  on  the  Jewish 
and  Christian  Scriptures.  I  have  endeavoured  to 
show  that,  even  while  a  Christian  man  is  unable  to 
reach  any  definite  and  secure  conclusion  on  the  con- 
troversy concerning  the  origin  of  the  Four  Gospels, 
his  faith  in  Christ  as  Son  of  God  and  Saviour  of  men 
may  remain  firm  ;  that  he  has  grounds  and  reasons 
for  his  faith  which  lie  beyond  the  reach  of  criticism 
concerning  the  authorship  and  authenticity  of  these 
wonderful  narratives  ;  that  he  stands  on  a  rock,  and 
that  "  the  floods  of  great  waters,"  when  they  rise 
highest  and  rage  most  fiercely,  cannot  "come  nigh 
unto  him." 

But   though    faith   in    the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  may 
remain    firm,  while  the  historical  trustworthiness  of 

8a 


HO IV  TO  APrROACII   THE  EVIDENCE.  S3 

the  only  story  that  has  come  down  to  us  of  His 
earthly  ministry  is  regarded  as  uncertain,  Christian 
life  and  thought  suffer  a  loss  which  cannot  be 
measured.  In  the  remaining  Lectures  of  this  course 
I  therefore  propose  to  lay  before  you  some  of  the 
evidence  which  sustains  the  historical  trustworthiness 
of  the  Four  Gospels.  Can  we  trust  the  Gospels? 
Have  we  the  story  of  Christ  which  was  told  by  the 
apostles  and  personal  friends  of  our  Lord,  and  which 
was  received  by  the  first  generation  of  their  disciples? 
or  is  it  the  story  of  a  later  age  ?  The  primary  ques- 
tion, the  question  of  urgent  practical  importance,  is 
not  a  literary  one, — Did  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and 
John  write  these  books?  \i\x\.'&x\  historical  one, — Do 
these  books  contain  that  representation  of  our  Lord, 
that  account  of  His  miracles  and  teaching,  which  was 
given  by  the  men  who  knew  Him,  and  who,  after  His 
death,  preached  the  Christian  Faith  ? 

It  is  often  assumed  that  the  literary  question — the 
question  of  authorship — must  be  settled,  and  settled 
beyond  dispute  and  doubt,  before  we  can  be  sure  that 
the  contents  of  the  Gospels  are  trustworthy.  The 
principles  of  a  legal  trial  are  applied  to  this  inquiry. 
It  is  supposed  that  we  must  know  who  the  witnesses 
are  before  we  can  judge  of  the  value  of  their  testi- 
mony ;  that  we  must  be  sure  of  their  character  ;  that 
we  must  learn  whether  they  had  opportunities  for 
knowing  the  facts  ;  that  we  must  discover  whether 
they  are  reasonable  and  cautious  persons,  or  hasty 
and  fanatical. 


84  HO IV  TO  APPROACH   THE  EVIDENCE. 

But  this,  as  I  hope  to  show  before  these  Lectures 
are  finished,  is  to  invert  the  true  order  of  the  inquiry. 
In  the  case  of  the  first  three  Gospels  our  confidence 
in  tlicir  story  docs  not  rest  on  a  preHminary  demon- 
stration that  they  were  written  by  Matthew,  Mark, 
and  Luke,  and  that  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  were 
truthful  and  sagacious  men,  and  had  opportunities 
for  knowing  the  real  facts  of  our  Lord's  history.  I 
think  that  the  evidence  that  they  wrote  these  Gospels 
is  sufficient ;  but  if  it  were  insufficient,  if  we  had 
reason  to  believe  that  their  names  were  attached  to 
these  three  narratives  on  the  authority  of  a  doubtful 
tradition,  my  confidence  in  their  account  of  our 
Lord's  life  and  ministry  would  not  be  disturbed.  I 
believe  that  these  three  Gospels  contain  a  trustworthy 
accouitt  of  our  Lord,  whoever  may  have  zvritteii  them. 
I  receive  their  story,  not  on  the  uncorroborated  testi- 
mony of  the  three  men  by  whom  they  were  written, 
or  by  whom  it  is  commonly  supposed  that  they  were 
written,  but  on  the  authority  of  the  first  generation 
of  Christians,  who  had  learned  the  Christian  Gospel 
and  the  earthly  history  of  our  Lord  from  the  original 
apostles  and  other  personal  friends  of  Christ. 

In  the  case  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  the  question  of 
trustworthiness    is   more   deeply   implicated    in    the 

question  of  authorship.     I    believe  that  the  proof 

external  and  internal  taken  together  —  of  John's 
authorship  is  not  merely  sufficient,  but  decisive.  But, 
even  in  the  case  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  the  primary 
and  important  question  is  not,  Did  the  Apostle  John 


HO IV  TO  APPROACH   THE  EVIDENCE.  85 

write  the  book?  but,  Does  the  book  contaui  in 
substance  the  account  of  our  Lord  which  John  was 
accustomed  to  give  to  his  disciples  ?  The  aim  there- 
fore of  the  following  Lectures  is  to  show  that  the 
story  of  the  Lord  in  our  Four  Gospels  is  the  story 
which  was  told  by  the  apostles  themselves. 

There  is  no  dispute  that  at  the  close  of  the  second 
century  these  Gospels  were  received  by  all  Christian 
Churches  as  absolutely  trustworthy,  and  as  having 
the  authority  which  belongs  to  sacred  Scriptures  : 
but  I  shall  not  take  this  for  granted  ;  I  shall  offer 
some  illustrations  of  the  evidence  on  which  it  rests. 
From  the  end  of  the  second  century  I  shall  trace 
back  the  history  of  the  books  and  of  the  story  which 
they  contain,  until  we  reach  the  generation  of  Chris- 
tians that  received  the  Christian  Gospel  from  the 
original  apostles. 

It  will  not,  I  fear,  be  very  easy  to  present  the 
argument  in  a  form  that  will  be  always  and  imme- 
diately intelligible  to  an  audience  unfamiliar  w'.th 
these  inquiries  and  unfamiliar  with  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church  in  the  second  century ;  I  shall  be 
able  to  state  only  a  part  of  the  historical  evidence  by 
which  the  trustworthiness  of  the  Gospels  is  sustained  ; 
other  lines  of  evidence,  some  of  which  cannot  be 
conclusive  except  to  scholars,  must  be  wholly  set 
aside.     I  will  do  what  I  can. 

But  I  may  be  told  that,  even  when  I  have  proved 
that  the  story  is  the  story  which  was  told  by  Peter, 
aixl  John,  and  James,  and  Andrew,  and  Thilip,  and 


S6  nOlV  TO  APPROACH    THE  EVIDENCE. 

Matthew,  and  the  other  apostles  of  Christ,  I  have 
not  made  my  position  secure.  Peter,  John,  James, 
Andrew,  Thih'p,  Matthew,  and  the  rest,  were  they 
men  to  be  trusted  ?  For  myself  I  do  not  care  to 
vindicate  their  integrity  and  trustworthiness ;  but  if 
the  Four  Gospels  contain  the  story  which  they  told 
of  the  Master  whom  they  worshipped,  their  integrity 
is  apparent,  and  their  trustworthiness  needs  no  vindi- 
cation. And  as  I  am  fully  convinced  that  they  told 
this  story,  I  believe  that  our  Lord  delivered  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the  great  discourse  in  the 
upper  room  in  Jerusalem  ;  and  that  He  gave  sight 
to  the  blind,  hearing  to  the  deaf,  and  speech  to  the 
dumb,  raised  from  the  dead  the  daughter  of  Jairus 
and  the  son  of  the  widow  of  Nain,  and  called  Lazarus 
from  the  grave  after  he  had  been  dead  four  days. 

I. 

But  there  is  a  preliminary  question  to  be  con- 
sidered :  Hoiv  are  ive  to  approach  the  consideration  of 
the  evidence  that  the  Four  Gospels  contain  the  story  of 
our  Lord  ivhich  zvas  told  by  His  apostles  and  friends  ? 
The  answer  to  that  question  may  determine  the  issue 
of  the  whole  investigation  ;  one  answer  to  it  would, 
for  all  practical  purposes,  make  the  investigation  irre- 
levant and  unnecessar}'. 

Let  me  explain  what  I  mean.  Of  all  recent 
theories  assailing  the  historical  trustworthiness  of 
the  G(^spcls,  those  of  Strauss  and  of  Ferdinand  Baur 
arc  the  most    famous.      Strauss  does   not  begin    by 


no IV  TO  APPROACH  THE  EVIDENCE.  S; 

inquiring  into  the  strength  of  the  evidence  by  which 
the  Christian  story  is  supported  ;  he  denies  that  any 
evidence  can  make  it  credible.  Miracles,  he  says,  are 
impossible ;  the  Gospels  attribute  miracles  to  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  ;  therefore  the  Gospels  cannot  be 
historically  trustworthy.  His  examination  of  the 
evidence  for  the  early  date  of  the  Gospels  is  ex- 
tremely slight.  His  main  business  was,  not  to 
discover  whether  there  is  evidence  that  the  story  is 
true,  but  to  account  for  its  origin,  supposing  it  to  be 
false.  When  he  published  the  first  edition  of  his 
Life  of  Jesus ^  he  was  unwilling  to  attribute  the  story 
to  deliberate  invention  ;  he  thought  that  he  could 
explain  how  myths  and  legends  about  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  were  likely  to  spring  up  spontaneously  in 
the  fervent  imagination  and  vehement  devotion  of 
the  second  and  third  generations  of  His  disciples  ; 
and  he  believed  that  these  mythical  and  legendary 
narratives  were  regarded  by  the  unknown  authors  of 
the  Four  Gospels  as  trustworthy  traditions  of  our 
Lord's  earthly  history. 

The  object  of  Strauss  was  to  account  for  the  origin 
of  the  story.  In  the  judgment  of  Ferdinand  Baur, 
Strauss's  theory  did  not  account  for  the  books  which 
contain  the  story.  It  failed  to  account  for  the  books 
which  bear  the  names  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke. 
It  failed  still  more  flagrantly  to  account  for  the  Gos- 
pel of  John.  That  Gospel  cannot  be  treated  as  a 
collection  of  mythical  narratives  which  had  sprung 
up  spontaneously  among  devout  and  fervent  Christian 


8S  HOIV  TO  APPRO  AC II   HIE  EVIDENCE. 

people.  It  is  a  theological  treatise,  with  a  regular 
plan  and  definite  dogmatic  purposes.  According  to 
Baur,  it  represents  a  certain  "  tendency  "  of  thought ; 
and  he  therefore  assigns  it  to  a  time,  late  in  the 
second  century,  when,  as  he  thinks,  it  was  natural 
that  a  Gospel  with  such  a  "  tendency "  should  have 
been  written.  He  distributes  dates  to  the  other  three 
Gospels  on  the  same  principle.  He  thinks  that,  while 
the  Gospels  embody  many  popular  traditions  of 
Christ,  to  which  the  imagination  and  devotion  of  the 
Church  had  given  a  miraculous  character,  the  four 
unknown  writers  felt  themselves  free  to  invent  addi- 
tional miracles  in  order  to  add  to  the  force  and 
impressiveness  of  their  narratives.  They  felt  them- 
selves equal!)'  free  to  invent  discourses  which  would 
support  certain  theological  and  controversial  positions, 
and  to  attribute  them  to  our  Lord. 

It  is  sometimes  said  that  Christian  men  enter  on 
the  investigation  of  the  evidence  for  the  authority  of 
the  writings  of  the  New  Testament  with  their  minds 
already  made  up,  because  these  writings  are  the 
foundation  of  their  faith.  I  have  tried  to  show  that, 
whether  or  not  the  New  Testament  writings  can  be 
proved  to  be  trustworthy  on  historical  grounds,  our 
faith  in  Ciirist  remains  unshaken.  But  the  charge 
may  be  retorted  on  the  assailants  of  traditional 
beliefs.  Strauss  begins  his  Life  of  fesiis  with  the 
dogma — a  dogma  fcr  which  Vie  offers  no  proof,  and 
for  which,  as  far  as  I  know,  nothing  of  the  nature  of 
proof  has  ever  been  offered — that  miracles  are  impos- 


HOJV   TO  APPROACH  THE    EVIDENCE.  Sg 

sible.  His  conclusion  is  therefore  reached  before  the 
inquiry  is  begun.  The  verdict  is  given  before  a  wit- 
ness is  called.  Baur's  conception  of  the  history  of 
the  rise  of  the  Christian  Church  rests  on  the  assump- 
tion that  miracles  lie  outside  the  limits  of  history, 
and  that  the  origin  of  the  Christian  faith  is  to  be 
accounted  for  without  inquiring  into  the  reality  of 
the  miracles  attributed  to  our  Lord,  or  even  into  the 
reality  of  our  Lord's  resurrection. 

If  we  are  to  begin  our  investigation  with  these 
assumptions,  the  investigation  has  a  purely  acade- 
mical interest.  Assume  that  the  story  cannot  be  true, 
and  no  practical  end  is  to  be  attained  by  inquiring 
whether  our  Gospels  contain  the  story  which  was  told 
by  the  original  apostles  of  our  Lord. 

Nor  are  we  likely  to  reach  any  satisfactory  con- 
clusion if  we  isolate  the  story  from  the  preceding 
history  of  the  Jewish  race  to  which  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  belonged,  or  from  the  history  of  the  Chris- 
tian Faith,  of  which  He  was  the  Founder.  In  other 
words,  we  ought  to  take  into  account  a/l  the  facts 
that  have  any  real  bearing  on  our  investigation.  But 
through  mere  inconsiderateness,  our  Lord's  earthly 
history  is  often  torn  away  from  great  masses  of  facts 
in  which  it  is  embedded,  and  to  which  it  organically 
belongs. 

Many  people  seem  to  suppose  that  they  may 
approach  the  subject  as  if  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  had 
appeared  in  Spain  or  in  China,  instead  of  in  Judaea 
and  Galilee,  and  as  if  after  His  crucifixion  and  alleged 


90  I/O^y  TO  APPROACH  THE  EVIDENCE. 

resurrection  no  great  changes  had  taken  place  in  the 
religious  thought  and  life  of  mankind.  They  seem  to 
suppose  that  the  whole  proof  of  the  trustworthiness 
of  the  Four  Gospels  has  been  exhausted  when  they 
have  gone  through  certain  quotations  from  Christian 
and  heretical  writers  belonging  to  the  second  century. 
They  isolate  our  Lord's  earthly  life  from  all  that 
preceded  it  and  from  all  that  has  followed  it.  They 
treat  it  as  though  it  were  wholly  sporadic.  This  is 
contrary  to  sound  historical  principles.  The  story 
fits  in  with  known  facts.  It  is  rooted  in  a  great 
antecedent  history.  Its  supernatural  elements  are 
vitally  related  to  the  actual  order  of  the  world,  and 
are  necessary  to  account  for  some  of  the  greatest 
events  in  the  subsequent  history  of  mankind. 

I  shall  now  state  some  of  the  more  obvious  con- 
siderations which,  as  I  think,  should  be  present  to 
our  mind  when  vvc  enter  on  this  inquiry. 

II. 

We  are  separated  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  by 
more  than  eighteen  hundred  years.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  this  vast  interval  creates  many  difficulties 
in  the  way  of  ascertaining  with  certainty  whether  the 
story  of  His  life  which  has  come  down  to  us  is 
trustworthy.  We  cannot  deal  with  it,  and  with  the 
evidence  which  may  be  alleged  for  it,  as  if  we  were 
living  at  the  close  of  the  second  century  or  the 
beginning  of  the  third.  Early  Christian  writings, 
containing  materials  of  great  importance  in  relation 


IIOIV  TO  APPROACH  THE  EVIDENCE.  91 

to  this  inquiry,  are  known  to  us  only  by  extracts 
and  allusions.  Others  have  wholly  disappeared. 
Further,  in  the  time  of  Irenaeus,  of  Tertullian,  and  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  the  force  of  the  tradition  of 
Christ  was  still  strong.  Great  masses  of  evidence,  by 
which  they  were  assured  that  the  Four  Gospels  con- 
tained a  true  account  of  our  Lord,  are  irrecoverably 
lost.  It  is  impossible  for  us  to  place  ourselves  in 
the  position  of  those  who  were  living  so  near  to  the 
apostolic  age. 

But  if  much  has  been  lost,  much  has  been  gained 
We  approach  this  inquiry  through  those  great 
achievements  of  the  Christian  Faith  which  extend 
over  the  intervening  centuries.  We  know  the  power 
which  it  has  exerted  over  the  religious,  ethical,  and 
intellectual  life  of  the  most  highly  civilized  nations 
in  the  world.  It  has  given  them  august  conceptions 
of  God.  It  has  exalted  their  conception  of  the 
dignity  of  man.  It  has  rescued  from  neglect  and 
dishonour  some  of  the  most  gracious  and  beautiful  of 
human  virtues  ;  it  has  allied  the  awful  and  tender 
sanctions  of  religion  with  the  common  duties  of 
morality.  It  has  given  fire  and  dignity  to  literature 
and  art.  It  has  inspired  a  heroism  of  devotion  to 
the  service  of  the  sick,  the  miserable,  and  the  fallen. 
It  has  created  in  saints  a  passion  for  holiness. 
Through  century  after  century,  and  in  many  lands, 
it  has  disciplined  millions  of  obscure  men  to  honesty, 
temperance,   patience,    kindliness,    cheerful    content- 


r2  y/O/F    TO  APPROACH    THE  EVIDENCE. 

mcnt,  and  all  the  virtues  which  contribute  to  the 
happiness  of  private  citizens,  and  to  the  peace,  order, 
and  progress  of  states.  It  has  consoled  men  in  their 
sorrows  ;  it  has  given  them  hope  in  death. 

These  are  among  the  obvious  and  uncontested 
effects  of  the  power  of  the  Christian  Faith.  They 
should  be  remembered — they  should  be  taken  into 
account — when  we  are  considering  the  evidence  for 
the  truth  of  the  story  which  has  come  down  to  us  of 
the  earthly  history  of  its  Founder.  What  might  be 
incredible  if  it  were  told  us  of  another  man,  who  had 
done  nothing  to  change  the  fortunes  of  the  world, 
may  be  credible  of  Him.  If  miracles  could  do  any- 
thing to  deepen  the  impression  produced  by  His 
personal  force  and  by  His  teaching — an^'thing  to 
confirm  the  faith,  the  loyalty,  and  the  courage  of 
His  allies  and  agents  in  the  earliest  movements  of 
so  immense  and  beneficent  a  revolution  ;  if,  on  the 
hypothesis  that  He  was  more  than  man — and  this 
has  been  the  faith  of  His  disciples  from  the  very 
beginning — miracles  could  contribute  anything  to  the 
illustration  of  His  superhuman  greatness  ;  if,  on  the 
hypothesis  that  He  had  come  to  be  the  Saviour,  not 
merely  the  teacher,  of  the  human  race — and  this  too 
has  always  been  part  of  the  very  substance  of  the 
Christian  Gospel — miracles  could  contribute  anything 
to  the  illustration  of  the  true  nature  of  His  mission  : 
then  there  were  adequate  reasons  for  their  occurrence, 
and  they  have  achieved  their  purpose. 

The  power  of  the  miracles  attributed  to  our  Lord 


nOlV  TO  APPROACH   THE  EVIDENCE.  93 

was  not  exhausted  in  the  impression  which  they  are 
said  to  have  produced  on  the  people  who  witnessed 
them  ;  nor,  in  later  ages,  has  their  chief  service  con- 
sisted in  the  evidence  which  they  offer  that  He  was 
sent  of  God.  It  has  been  one  of  the  chief  glories  of 
the  Christian  Faith  that  it  has  taught  men  to  care  for 
the  sick  and  the  suffering.  Even  in  the  most  corrupt 
times  of  the  most  corrupt  Churches,  the  obligation 
to  relieve  all  forms  of  human  misery  has  never  been 
wholly  forgotten.  It  belongs  to  the  very  essence  of 
Christian  ethics  ;  for  a  Christian  Church  to  deny  it 
would  be  as  impossible  as  for  a  Christian  Church  to 
deny  the  Unity  of  God  or  the  reality  of  judgment 
to  come.  Nor  has  the  recognition  of  the  obligation 
been  ineffective.  Christian  men  have  had  a  passion 
of  pity  for  wretchedness,  and  in  every  country  of 
Christendom  great  foundations  of  charity  have  been 
created  in  obedience  to  the  authority  of  Christ  and 
in  imitation  of  His  example. 

"  In  obedience  to  the  authority  of  Christ  and  in 
imitation  of  His  example."  But  how  is  the  authorit}' 
expressed  ?  and  in  what  facts  has  the  example  been 
given  ?  Where  has  Christendom  learnt  that  it  fol- 
lows Christ  by  feeding  the  poor;  by  building  hospitals 
for  the  sick,  asylums  for  the  aged,  for  the  deaf,  the 
dumb,  and  the  blind  ;  by  giving  shelter  and  aid  to 
every  description  of  physical  infirmity  and  misery? 
Cancel  the  miracles,  and  how  much  remains  to 
account  for  the  great  —  I  might  almost  say  the 
supreme — place  which  this  duty  of  showing  mercy 


94  aOlV  TO  ArPKOACII  THE  EVIDENCE. 

to  the  miserable  has  held  in  the  thought  and  life  of 
the  Church  through  all  the  Christian  centuries  ? 

The  miracles  of  Christ  have  given  the  law  to  Chris- 
tian charity.  Thousands  of  lepers  have  felt  the 
touch  of  a  kindly  hand,  and  have  had  their  sufferings 
soothed  by  human  tenderness,  because  it  has  been 
believed  that  Christ  was  moved  with  compassion 
\\hen  He  saw  the  leper  of  Galilee,  and  healed  him. 
Millions  of  hungry  men  and  women  and  children 
have  been  fed,  because  it  has  been  believed  that 
Christ  multiplied  the  loaves  and  fishes.  Thousands  of 
hospitals  and  asylums  have  been  built,  tens  of  thou- 
sands of  Christian  men  and  women  have  devoted 
their  lives  to  the  service  and  relief  of  human  misery, 
because  it  has  been  believed  that  Christ  healed  the 
sick,  gave  sight  toi  the  blind,  hearing  to  the  deaf, 
and  speech  to  the  dumb.  I  cannot  refuse  to  the 
glorious  ministries  of  Christian  charity  a  place  in  the 
consideration  of  the  question  whether  the  miracles 
attributed  to  Christ  were  really  wrought  by  Him.  I 
see  that  a  confident  belief  that  He  wrought  them  has 
been  the  inspiration  and  the  law  of  some  of  the  fairest 
of  those  great  works  in  which  the  characteristic  spirit 
of  the  Christian  Faith  has  been  illustrated.  It  was 
worth  while  to  work  the  miracles  ;  for  in  every  age, 
and  in  e\-ery  land,  and  in  the  hearts  of  a  great  mul- 
titude that  no  man  can  number,  they  have  opened 
fountains  of  compassion  for  human  suffering.  It  was 
worth  while  to  work  them  ;  for  they  are  the  origin 
of  the    relief  and    consolation    which    have  lessened 


no IV   TO  APPROACH  THE  EVIDENCE.  95 

the  pains  and  soothed  the  wretchedness  of  countless 
millions  of  the  human  race. 

III. 

There  is  another  very  obvious  characteristic  of  the 
Christian  Faith  which  has  a  very  close  relation  to  this 
inquiry.  Christendom,  according  to  Mr.  Emerson, 
has  "  dwelt  with  noxious  exaggeration  on  the  Person 
of  Christ."  Had  Christendom  gone  further  in  the 
"  exaggeration  "  of  its  devotion  to  Him,  Christendom 
would  have  been  stronger  and  nobler.  But  the 
criticism  points  to  a  fact  of  infinite  significance.  In 
the  religion  of  Christ,  Christ  is  the  larger  part  of  the 
religion.  Here  the  Prophet  is  greater  than  the 
prophecy,  the  Messenger  of  God  is  greater  than  the 
message.  It  has  been  so  from  the  beginning.  With- 
in five-and-twenty  or  thirty  years  after  His  crucifixion 
He  was  spoken  of  by  His  disciples  as  being  in  a 
high  and  unique  sense  the  Son  of  God;  and  "the 
grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ "  was  associated  with 
"the  love  of  God  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy 
Ghost"  in  an  apostolic  benediction.  His  disciples 
believed  that  His  death  was  a  great  and  critical 
event  in  the  history  of  the  whole  human  race :  "  One 
died  for  all,  therefore  all  died  ;  and  He  died  for 
all,  that  they  which  live  should  no  longer  live  unto 
themselves,  but  unto  Him  who  for  their  sakes  died, 
and  rose  again."  That  conception  of  His  death  re- 
veals a  conception  of  His  Person  which  is  "  dark  with 
excess  of  light."     What  must  He  have  been  in  whose 


96  IIGIV  TO  APPKOACI!  THE   EVIDENCE. 

death  the  whole  race  "died,"  and  through  whose 
resurrection  the  whole  race  may  "  live  unto  God  "  ? 
His  crucifixion  was  an  awful  crime:  and  yet  we  are. 
"justified  by  His  blood,"  and  through  Him  we  are 
to  be  saved  from  "  the  wrath,"  the  wrath  of  the 
Eternal.  And,  further,  the  Saviour  of  the  world  is 
also  the  Judge  of  the  world  ;  all  men  are  to  "  be  made 
manifest  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ ;  that 
each  one  may  receive  the  things  done  in  the  body, 
according  to  that  which  he  hath  done,  whether  it 
be  good  or  bad." 

This,  it  may  be  said,  is  Paul's  conception  of  Christ ; 
but  we  have  Paul's  word  for  it  that,  when  he  had 
"  laid  before  "  James  and  Peter  and  John  the  Gospel 
that  he  preached  among  the  Gentiles,  they  gave  him 
"the  right  hand  of  fellowship,"  and  acknowledged 
that  he  had  been  "entrusted  with  the  Gospel  of  the 
uncircumcision,  even  as  Peter  with  the  Gospel  of  the 
circumcision  "  ;  they  preached  in  substance  the  same 
Gospel — Peter  to  the  Jews,  Paul  to  the  Gentiles. 

The  Apocalypse — written  only  a  few  years  later, 
and  written  by  the  Apostle  John,  as  many  of  those 
acknowledge  who  refuse  to  accept  the  Gospels  as 
genuine — contains  conceptions  of  Christ  not  inferior 
in  majesty.  He  is  coming  "  with  the  clouds :  and 
every  eye  .shall  see  Him,  and  they  which  pierced 
Him  ;  and  all  the  tribes  of  the  earth  shall  mourn 
over  Him."  The  angels  of  heaven,  and  the  Church, 
and  the  "  living  creatures,"  are  represented  as  saying 
"  with  a  great  voice.  Worthy  is  the  Lamb  that  hath 


IIOJV  TO  APPROACH  THE   EVIDENCE.  97 

been  slain  to  receive  the  power,  and  riches,  and 
wisdom,  and  might,  and  honour,  and  glory,  and  bless- 
ing." Nor  is  this  all:  "Every  created  thing  which  is 
in  the  heavens,  and  on  the  earth,  and  under  the  earth, 
and  in  the  sea,  and  all  things  that  are  in  them,  heard 
1  saying.  Unto  Him  that  sitteth  on  the  throne,  and 
unto  the  Lamb,  be  the  blessing,  and  the  honour, 
and  the  glory,  and  the  dominion  for  ever  and  ever." 
Christ  is  "  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords."  The 
death  of  Christ  is  as  wonderful  in  the  Apocalypse  as 
in  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  The  four  and  twenty  elders 
"  sing  a  new  song,  saying.  Worthy  art  Thou  to  take 
the  book,  and  to  open  the  seals  thereof:  for  Thou 
wast  slain,  and  didst  purchase  unto  God  with  Thy 
blood  men  of  every  tribe,  and  tongue,  and  people, 
and  nation."  John,  who  knew  Christ  "  after  the 
flesh,"  John,  "  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved,"  attri- 
butes to  Christ  a  glory  as  great  as  that  which  is 
attributed  to  Him  by  the  apostle  to  whom  He 
appeared  "  last  of  all,  as  unto  one  born  out  of  due 
time." 

That  during  His  earthly  life  His  disciples  did  not 
know  how  great  He  was  is  certain  ;  but  is  it  con- 
ceivable that  there  were  no  premonitions  of  the  dis- 
covery which  came  to  them  after  His  ascension  to 
heaven  ?  The  miracles  attributed  to  Him  in  the 
Gospels — miracles  which  He  worked  in  His  own  power 
— harmonize  with  the  conception  of  His  transcendent 
greatness  which  appears  in  the  Apocalypse  of  John 
and  in  the  uncontested  T^pistlcs  of  Paul.     They  con- 

L.  C.  7 


qS  110 IV   TO  AT  PRO  AC  II   THE   EVIDENCE. 

tributcd  to  the  foundation  on  which  such  a  concep- 
tion might  be  built.  If  during  His  earthly  life  Christ 
exerted  no  greater  powers  than  belong  to  man,  it  is 
hard  to  understand  how  His  friends  were  prepared 
to  recognise  in  Him,  when  He  had  returned  to  the 
Father,  the  glory  of  the  eternal  Son  of  God. 

IV. 

Again  :  our  Lord  belonged  to  a  race  which  had 
reached  a  very  great  and  a  very  noble  conception  of 
God.  It  is  unnecessary  to  discuss  contested  questions 
of  Old  Testament  criticism.  The  Jewish  prophets — 
this  is  certain — were  filled  with  awe  in  the  presence 
of  the  Eternal  ;  they  worshipped  and  feared  Him  as 
infinitely  great  and  infinitely  glorious  ;  and  He  was 
a  God  in  whose  righteousness  and  mercy  men  might 
perfectly  trust.  Their  religious  faith  was  the  inspira- 
tion and  the  support  of  a  lofty  morality.  Kings  and 
people  were  warned  that  no  prayers  or  sacrifices 
could  shelter  them  from  the  anger  of  Jehovah  if  they 
were  guilty  of  injustice,  cruelty,  and  oppression  : 
"  When  ye  spread  forth  your  hands,  I  will  hide  Mine 
eyes  from  you  :  yea,  when  ye  make  many  prayers,  I 
will  not  hear :  your  hands  are  full  of  blood.  Wash 
you,  make  you  clean  ;  put  away  the  evil  of  your 
doings  from  before  Mine  eyes  ;  cease  to  do  evil  ; 
learn  to  do  well  ;  seek  judgment,  relieve  the  op- 
pressed, judge  the  fatherless,  plead  for  the  widow." 

And  for  many  generations  the  Jewish  people  had 
been    expecting   the  coming  of  a  great   Prophet,  a 


I/OIV  TO  APPROACH    THE   EVIDENCE.  99 

great  Prince, — the  Servant,  the  Messenger,  the  Repre- 
sentative of  Jehovah.  Our  Lord,  according  to  the 
Four  Gospels,  claimed  to  be  the  Christ  of  Jewish 
prophecy  and  hope  ;  and  if  the  representation  of  Him 
given  in  the  Gospels  and  in  the  other  New  Testament 
writings  is  true,  the  prophecy  and  the  hope  have  been 
wonderfully  fulfilled.  He  is  not  indeed  the  Christ 
that  cither  the  people  or  the  prophets  expected  ;  but 
He  is  infinitely  greater.  He  is  a  Prophet  whose 
Divine  commission  has  been  acknowledged  by  great 
nations  for  many  centuries  ;  a  Prince  who  has  com- 
manded in  many  lands,  and  for  more  than  sixty 
generations,  an  absolute  obedience  and  a  passionate 
loyalty  such  as  were  never  given  during  this  brief 
earthly  life,  and  within  the  boundaries  of  a  single 
state,  to  the  greatest  of  earthly  sovereigns. 

It  is  extremely  remarkable,  to  say  the  least,  that 
so  singular  a  hope  should  have  received — or  should 
appear  to  have  received — so  singular  a  fulfilment. 
It  is  extremely  remarkable  that  the  enduring 
sovereignty  over  great  nations,  which,  according  to 
Jewish  hope,  was  to  be  achieved  by  their  Messiah,  has 
been  actually  achieved  by  One  of  their  own  race, 
and  achieved  in  a  far  loftier  form  than  their  prophets 
had  anticipated.  It  is  extremely  remarkable  that  the 
sovereignty  should  have  fallen  to  One  whose  earthly 
history  was  wholly  unlike  what  the  Jewish  people 
liad  supposed  would  be  the  earthly  history  of  their 
Messiah  —  so  unlike,  that  to  have  constructed  the 
Gtory   of    Christ,   in   its   substance   and    its   decisive 


loo  ZfO^F  TO  APPROACH  THE   EVIDENCE. 

events,  out  of  the  popular  expectation  would  have 
been  impossible.  And  what,  for  our  present  purpose, 
is  most  remarkable  of  all,  is  that  the  story  as  told  in 
the  Gospels,  including  the  manifestation  of  our  Lord's 
miraculous  power,  forms  a  perfect  transition  from  the 
ancient  hope  of  the  Jewish  people  to  its  transcendent 
accomplishment  in  the  present  glory  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

V. 

It  is  my  contention  that  these  considerations 
cannot  be  reasonably  disregarded  in  our  judgment  on 
the  evidence  for  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the 
Four  Gospels.  The  main  objection — I  might  say  the 
only  objection — to  their  trustworthiness  rests  on  the 
miraculous  events  which  they  record.  In  judging 
whether  it  is  possible  and  probable  that  the  miracles 
were  wrought,  we  are  bound  to  take  into  account 
the  whole  of  the  Christian  case. 

Hardly  any  conceivable  strength  of  testimony 
would  convince  us  that  miracles  were  wrought  in 
England  three  or  four  hundred  years  ago  by  a  man 
who  was  remembered  only  by  the  miracles  that  were 
attributed  to  him.  If  it  were  affirmed,  even  by  con-' 
temporary  witnesses  whose  good  faith  we  had  no 
reason  to  doubt,  that  such  a  man  had  healed  the  sick, 
given  sight  to  the  blind,  raised  the  dead — a  man  in 
whose  personality  and  character  and  life,  so  far  as 
they  were  known  to  us  from  the  narratives  which 
recorded   his    miraculous  works,   there  Mas    nothing 


I/OfV  TO  APPROACH  THE  EVIDENCE.  loi 

wonderful,  nothing  unique,  nothing  that  created  the 
irresistible  impression  that  he  was  nearer  to  God  than 
other  men  ;  a  man  who  had  originated  no  great 
reformation  in  the  moral  and  religious  condition  of 
mankind,  had  given  to  the  race  no  loftier  and  more 
affecting  conceptions  of  God,  had  done  nothing  to 
deepen  the  reverence  of  men  for  God's  righteous- 
ness, nothing  to  make  them  the  heirs  of  a  larger 
blessedness  in  God's  love  ;  a  man  from  whom  there 
had  come  no  loftier,  more  gracious,  or  more  generous 
ideal  of  human  goodness,  no  new  force  to  sustain  us 
in  duty,  no  new  consolations  to  soothe  us  in  sorrow ; 
— if,  I  say,  it  were  affirmed  by  his  friends,  men 
apparently  intelligent  and  truthful,  that  such  a  man 
had  worked  miracles,  their  testimony  would  constitute 
a  curious  historical  problem,  to  which  we  might  be 
unable  to  find  any  solution  ;  but  it  would  not  com- 
mand our  belief.  In  this  imaginary  case  the  alleged 
miracles  would  be  sporadic,  isolated,  not  woven  into 
the  texture  of  the  actual  history  of  mankind. 

According  to  the  Christian  case,  the  miracles  of 
Christ  have  their  place  in  that  history.  They  belong 
to  the  life  and  work  of  One  who  has  changed,  and 
changed  immeasurably  for  the  better,  the  moral  and  ' 
religious  condition  of  great  nations,  and  whose  power 
after  the  lapse  of  eighteen  centuries  is  still  unspent. 
In  the  narratives  which  record  the  miracles  of  Christ 
the  miracles  are  not  the  most  wonderful  elements  : 
Mis  teaching,  His  unique  Personality,  the  Divine  per- 
fection revealed  under  human  conditions  in  Ilis  char- 


102  IIOJV  TO  APPROACH   THE  EVIDENCE. 

actcr  and  history,  arc  more  wonderful  still.  Finally, 
His  appearance  has  proved  to  be  the  transcendent 
fulfilment  of  a  great  hope  which,  for  many  centuries, 
had  been  the  stay,  the  strength,  and  the  consolation 
of  the  race  from  which  He  sprang,  a  race  to  which 
had  come  an  exceptional  knowledge  of  God.  That 
Christ  should  have  worked  miracles  does  not  surprise 
me.     It  would  have  surprised  me  if  He  had  not. 

VI. 

As  for  those  of  us  who  know  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
for  ourselves,  and  who  know  that  He  is  the  living 
Lord  and  Saviour  of  men,  the  Way  to  the  Father,  the 
Giver  of  eternal  life,  our  own  experience — confirmed 
by  the  experience  of  Christian  men  of  all  Churches 
and  all  ages — prevents  us  from  finding  anything 
incredible  in  the  miracles  which  He  is  alleged  to 
have  wrought  during  His  earthly  ministry. 

If  you  know  for  yourselves  the  living  and  glorified 
Christ,  if  you  have  found  God  in  Him,  if  you  have 
entered  into  the  actual  and  conscious  possession  of 
the  blessings  of  the  Christian  redemption,  you  will 
see  no  reason  for  doubting  the  historical  trust- 
worthiness of  the  Four  Gospels,  because  they  declare 
that,  during  our  Lord's  earthly  life.  He  healed  the 
sick,  gave  sight  to  the  blind,  and  raised  the  dead. 
"  He  has  done  greater  things  than  these,"  "  whereof 
we  all  are  witnesses." 

Strauss  began  his  investigation  by  assuming  that 
miracles    are    impossible,    and     that    therefore    the 


I/O  IV  TO  APPRO  AC /I  THE  EVIDENCE.  103 

story  of  the  Gospels  cannot  be  trustworthy.  We 
begin  the  investigation  by  assuming  that  miracles 
are  possible,  because  the  living  God  is  greater  than 
the  forces  of  the  material  universe  ;  and  that,  as  we 
know  that  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Savioul 
of  men,  it  is  probable  that,  even  during  the  years  of 
His  earthly  humiliation,  gracious  works,  which  God 
alone  could  achieve,  revealed  His  transcendent  great- 
ness. The  assumption  that  the  miracles  of  Christ 
are  impossible  is  an  assumption  absolutely  without 
support  ;  the  assumption  that  it  is  probable  that  He 
wrought  them  rests  on  the  personal  experience  of 
innumerable  Christian  men,  and  on  the  triumphs  and 
jrlories  of  the  Christian  Faith. 


LECTURE   VI. 

EUSEBIUS. 

IN  the  argument  which  I  propose  to  submit  to  you 
to  show  that  the  story  of  our  Lord  contained  in 
our  Four  Gospels  is  the  story  which  was  told  by 
the  original  apostles,  it  may  appear  at  first  sight — 
though  this  is  an  error  which  I  hope  to  remove — that 
no  evidence  drawn  from  writings  belonging  to  the 
second  half  of  the  second  century  can  liave  any 
weight.  But  the  whole  amount  of  the  Christian 
literature  produced  before  a.d.  150,  apart  from  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  seems  to  have  been 
inconsiderable  ;  and  of  that  which  was  produced  a 
large  part  has  unfortunately  been  lost.  Enough  how- 
ever remains  to  give  the  Gospels  solid  and  secure 
support. 

And  the  lost  books  are  not  wholly  unknown  to  us. 
Early  in  the  fourth  century  an  eminent  scholar,  a 
famous  bishop,  Eusebius  of  Ceesarea,  wrote  a  history 
of  the  Church  from  the  apostolic  age  to  his  own  ; 
and  in  this  he  gives  many  extracts  from  writings 
which  have  long  disappeared,  though  copies  of  some 


EUSEBIUS.  1C5 


of  them  may,  perhaps,  still    lie   hidden  in    Eastern 
monasteries,  and  may  yet  be  recovered. 


I. 

Eusebius  was  born  not  much  later  than  A.D.  260. 
The  place  of  his  birth  is  uncertain  ;  but  he  submitted 
to  the  Council  of  Nica^a  a  confession  of  faith  which 
he  said  that  he  had  been  taught  at  Csesarea  when 
he  was  a  child  and  while  he  was  a  catechumen.  His 
earliest  associations  were  with  that  city  ;  there  he 
was  baptized  ;  there  he  became  a  presbyter  ;  there 
too,  soon  after  A.D.  313,  he  became  bishop;  and  he 
was  bishop  of  Caesarea  at  his  death  A.D.  339  or  340. 

In  his  youth  he  was  the  friend  of  learned  men, 
especially  of  Pamphilus,  a  fellow  presbyter,  who  was 
a  passionate  disciple  of  Origen  of  Alexandria.  He 
had  access  to  great  libraries  :  the  library  of  Pam- 
philus, which  was  of  extraordinary  extent  and  value  ; 
and  the  library  collected  during  the  first  half  of  the 
third  century  by  Alexander,  bishop  of  Jerusalem. 
His  industry  must  have  been  immense  ;  he  published 
more  than  thirty  treatises — historical,  apologetic, 
doctrinal,  critical,  and  exegetical,  besides  orations 
and  sermons.  His  great  position  at  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  was  due,  no  doubt,  first  of  all,  to  the  intimacy 
of  his  relations  with  the  emperor.  He  alone  of  the 
Eastern  prelates  could  tell  what  was  in  the  emperor's 
mind;  "he  was  the  clerk  of  the  imperial  closet;  he 
was   the    interpreter,  the   chaplain,  the   confessor  of 


io5  EUSEBIUS. 


Constantine."  ^  But  he  was  also  ''  beyond  question 
the  most  learned  man  and  the  most  famous  living 
writer  in  the  Church  at  that  time."  - 

Before  the  meeting  of  the  council  he  had  inter- 
vened on  behalf  of  Arius,  and  had  remonstrated  with 
Alexander  of  Alexandria  for  deposing  him.  By  the 
more  vehement  enemies  of  Arianism  he  was  regarded 
with  great  distrust.  When  the  creed  of  Caesarea, 
which  he  proposed  to  the  council,  had  been  modified 
by  the  introduction  into  the  Nicene  Creed  of  the 
clauses  declaring  the  Son  to  be  "  of  the  substance  of 
the  Father,"  "  begotten  not  made,"  and  "  of  the  same 
substance "  {Jwuioonsioii)  with  the  Father,  Eusebius 
hesitated  whether  he  should  subscribe  it.  He  did 
not  like  the  new  terms ;  the  old  creed  of  his  baptism 
was  sufficiently  explicit  for  him  ;  nor  did  he  like  the 
anathema  appended  to  the  creed  condemning  Arian- 
ism. But  after  a  day's  consideration  he  signed  with 
the  rest,  and  in  a  letter  to  the  people  of  Caesarea 
he  explained  that,  "  though  he  would  resist  to  the 
last  any  vital  change  in  the  traditional  creed  of  his 
Church,  he  had  nevertheless  subscribed  to  these 
alterations,  when  assured  of  their  innocence,  to  avoid 
appearing  contentious."  "^ 

The  truth  seems  to  be  that  he  was  a  man  tolerant 


'  SrANLEY  :  Eastern  Church,  p.  102. 

^2  LiGHTFOOT  :     "Eusebius    of    Gesarea":     Dictionary    of 
Christian  Bi<yi^raphy,  vol.  ii.,  p,  312. 
'  //'/'/.,  p.  3 '3- 


EUSEBIUS.  107 


of  theological  differences,  profoundly  convinced  that 
neither  human  language  nor  human  thought  can 
define  the  mysteries  of  the  eternal  life  of  God  ;  and 
he  was  very  reluctant  to  deal  hardly  with  friends  of 
his  who  had  been  caught  by  the  bold  speculations  of 
Arius.  For  himself,  he  held  the  traditional  faith  ; 
but  he  did  not  see  that  Arianism  cut  it  up  by  the 
roots. 

If  we  were  to  describe  him  in  the  current  language 
of  our  own  times,  we  should  say  that  he  was  a  Broad 
Churchman,  orthodox,  but  not  inclined  to  be  rigorous 
in  exacting  from  other  men  an  acceptance  of  the 
orthodox  definitions  ;  and  that  in  his  intellectual 
temper  and  habits  he  was  a  scholar  and  literary  man, 
rather  than  a  theologian. 

II. 

In  his  time  there  were  seven  of  the  books  in- 
cluded in  our  New  Testament  about  whose  apostolic 
authority  the  opinion  of  the  Churches  was  divided  ; 
and  in  writing  his  History  Euscbius  proposed,  as  one 
of  his  objects,  to  make  some  contribution  towards  a 
decision  of  their  claims. 

The  books  of  the  New  Testament,  as  you  know, 
were  written  by  different  authors,  in  different  coun- 
tries, at  different  times.  There  are  many  questions 
to  be  asked  about  them  :  When  were  they  separated 
from  all  other  Christian  w^ritings  and  placed  in  a  class 
by  themselves  as  being  the  "  Sacred  Scriptures "  of 
the  Christian   Faith  ?     By  whose  authority  was  the 


loS  EUSEBIUS. 


selection  made?  On  what  grounds  were  some  books 
finally  included,  others  finally  rejected  ?  These  are 
subjects  which  you  will  find  discussed  in  histories  of 
the  New  Testament  canon. 

From  such  treatises  you  will  learn  that,  towards  the 
end  of  the  second  centur}',  and  at  least  as  early  as 
A.D.  185,  a  unique  and  sacred  authority  was  attributed 
to  nearly  all  the  writings  contained  in  our  New  Testa- 
ment. "  The  Scriptures  are  perfect,  inasmuch  as  they 
were  uttered  by  the  Word  of  God  and  His  Spirit." 
This  is  the  testimony  of  Ircn?cus  ;  and  by  the  Scrip- 
tures he  means  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and, 
with  a  few  inconsiderable  exceptions,  about  which 
opinion  was  divided,  the  books  of  the  New.  With 
these  exceptions,  our  New  Testament  books  had 
been  received  by  the  Christian  Church  as  authorita- 
tive and  sacred  for  at  least  twenty  years  before  the 
close  of  the  second  century  ;  and  they  were  regarded 
by  the  Christians  of  that  age  with  a  reverence  as  deep 
as  our  own. 

For  Christians  of  the  generation  to  which  Irena^us 
belonged,  Christians  living  in  every  part  of  the 
empire,  our  Four  Gospels — no  other  "Gospels"- — con- 
tained the  authoritative  story  of  our  Lord's  Life  and 
the  authoritative  record  of  His  teaching.  Our  Acts 
of  the  Apostles — no  other  "  Acts  " — contained  the 
authoritative  history  of  the  early  years  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church.  They  accepted  the  Epistles  of  Paul, 
which  have  a  place  in  our  own  New  Testament,  the 
First  Epistle  of  Peter,  and  the  lurst   Epistle  of  John, 


E  USEE  I  us.  109 

as  containing  the  authoritative  teaching  of  apostles 
who  spoke  in  the  name  of  Christ. 

These  books  had  been  separated  from  all  others, 
not  by  the  decree  of  a  council  or  in  submission  to 
the  judgment  of  a  great  theologian  or  bishop,  but 
by  the  general  consent  of  Christian  Churches  in  every 
part  of  the  world.  The  process  had  been  a  silent 
one.  No  one  can  tell  how  the  result  had  been 
brought  about.  But  it  is  certain  that,  about  the  year 
A.D.  180,  the  books  which  I  have  enumerated  were 
regarded  as  "  the  Christian  Scriptures,"  as  books 
written  under  Divine  inspiration  and  having  Divine 
authority  ;  and  they  had  their  place  side  by  side 
with  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Concerning  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the 
Epistles  of  James  and  Jude,  the  Second  Epistle  of 
Peter,  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of  John,  there 
was  not,  in  that  early  age,  the  same  unanimity  of 
judgment.  The  Apocalypse,  which  was  generally 
received  at  the  close  of  the  second  century,  was 
regarded  with  serious  distrust  in  the  third.  The 
apostolic  origin  of  some  of  these  seven  disputed 
books  was  acknowledged  by  the  Churches  of  one 
country  and  denied  by  the  Churches  of  another. 
Eminent  scholars  and  bishops  differed  about  them. 
No  attempt  was  made  for  a  long  time  to  determine 
the  question  by  authority.^ 


^  Note  A  in  Appendix. 


MO  ECSEBIUS. 

III. 

Euscbius,  as  I  have  said,  proposed  in  his  History 
to  make  some  contribution  towards  the  settlement 
of  the  claims  of  these  disputed  books,  by  showing 
what  use  had  been  made  of  them  in  the  earlier  ages 
of  the  Church.  He  also  proposed  to  record  anything 
interesting  that  he  might  discover  concerning  the 
books  which  were  universally  received  by  the  Church, 
liut  he  draws  a  very  clear  distinction  between  the 
way  in  which  he  intends  to  deal  with  the  two  classes 
of  writings.  He  promises  that,  if  he  finds  in  any 
Church  writer  a  quotation  from  a  disputed  book,  or 
a  reference  to  a  disputed  book,  he  will  call  attention 
to  it.  Every  such  quotation  or  reference  would 
illustrate  the  authority  which  the  book  held  in  the 
judgment  of  an  earlier  generation  of  Christians,  and 
would  assist  to  determine  its  claims  to  be  included 
among  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  But  to  give  quota- 
tions from  the  undisputed  books,  and  references  to 
them,  was  unnecessary  :  the  authority  of  these  books 
was  not  doubtful,  it  was  universally  acknowledged. 
If  however  he  found  in  early  Christian  writers  any 
interesting  statement  or  information,  either  about  the 
books  which  were  universally  received,  or  about  the 
other  seven,  he  promises  to  give  it  a  place  in  his 
History. 

His  general  principle  would  not  have  required  him 
to  call  attention  to  any  mere  references  to  the  First 
Epistle   of  John  or  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter ;  their 


EUSEBIUS. 


genuineness  had  always  been  acknowledged.  But, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  he  does  call  attention  to  the 
references  to  those  Epistles  which  are  found  in  some 
early  writers.  "  He  may  have  thought,"  says  Dr. 
Lightfoot,  ''  that  this  would  conduce  to  a  just  estimate 
of  the  meaning  of  silence  in  the  case  of  disputed 
Epistles,  as  2  Peter  and  2  and  3  John."  ^ 

Eusebius  was  a  man  of  large  learning.  He  had 
access  to  some  of  the  best  libraries  of  Christian 
literature  that  existed  in  his  time.  Many  books 
which  are  now  lost  were  in  his  hands.  From  some 
of  them  he  gives  interesting  and  important  extracts. 
It  was  his  declared  purpose  to  collect  and  to  record 
whatever  information  he  found  in  earlier  Christian 
writers,  both  concerning  the  seven  disputed  books 
and  the  books  which  had  secured  their  place  among 
the  sacred  books  of  the  Church.  He  was  a  fair- 
minded  man,  with  the  instincts  and  habits  of  a 
scholar.  But  throughout  his  History  there  is  no  hint 
that  any  uncertainty  had  ever  existed  in  the  Church 
with  regard  to  the  authority  of  the  Four  Gospels. 
There  is  nothing  to  suggest  that  they  had  first 
appeared  after  the  death  of  the  men  whose  names 
they  bear.  It  is  inconceivable  that  Christian  Churches 
independent  of  each  other,  inheriting  different  tradi- 
tions, and  situated  in  different  countries,  would  have 
come    to    accept  these    four    books    as    the    genuine 


'  Essays  on   the    Work   entitled  "  Supernatural  Religion" 
p.  47. 


EUSEIUUS. 


writings  of  Matthew  and  John,  Mark  and  Luke,  if 
they  had  appeared  for  the  first  time,  and  without 
explanation,  when  Matthew  and  John,  Mark  and 
Luke,  had  all  passed  away.  And  if  any  explanation 
of  their  late  appearance  had  been  given,  it  is  also 
inconceivable  that  no  trace  of  it  should  have  sur- 
vived. In  the  Christian  writings  which  have  come 
down  to  us  there  is  no  hint  of  any  such  explanation. 
If  any  hint  of  it  had  existed  in  the  writings  which 
are  now  lost,  but  which  Eusebius  possessed,  he 
would  certainly  have  told  us  about  it. 

IV. 

Take  the  Gospel  of  John.  If  a  book  of  such  im- 
mense theological  importance  as  the  Fourth  Gospel 
had  appeared,  for  the  first  time,  thirty,  forty,  or  fifty 
years  after  John's  death,  can  we  imagine  that  its 
claims  would  have  been  unchallenged?  Would  no 
Church  writer  have  expressed  a  wish  for  some 
account  of  its  history  ?  Would  no  question  have 
been  asked  as  to  the  reasons  why,  if  it  had  really 
been  written  by  the  apostle,  it  had  not  been  given 
to  the  Church  thirty,  forty,  fifty  years  before  ?  Down 
to  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  and  later,  there 
were  Christian  bishops  living  in  different  parts  of  the 
world  who  in  their  early  years  had  known  John  or 
the  friends  of  John  :  would  they  not  have  wanted  to 
learn  how  it  was  that  a  Gospel  of  which  they  had 
never  heard  had  appeared  with  John's  name  ?  And 
would   not    the   unknown   writer    who    had    had    the 


EUSEBIUS.  113 


courage  to  attribute  his  fictitious  Gospel  to  the 
apostle  have  also  had  the  courage  to  give  some 
fictitious  answer  to  these  inquiries  ?  Would  not  the 
miraculous  ingenuity  which  enabled  him  to  write  a 
story  of  Christ,  which  during  so  many  centuries  has 
commanded  the  wonder  and  awe  of  mankind,  have 
been  equal  to  the  invention  of  a  tale  concerning 
the  manner  in  which  the  book  had  been  preserved, 
and  the  grounds  for  delaying  its  publication,  which 
would  have  had  an  irresistible  fascination  and  charm, 
— a  tale  far  too  beautiful  and  too  pathetic  to  have 
passed  out  of  the  memory  of  the  Church  ? 

If  any  questions  about  the  book  had  been  asked,  if 
any  answers  had  been  given,  Eusebius  would  have 
told  us  about  them  ;  for  he  promises  to  mention  what 
has  been  said  by  earlier  writers  concerning  the  undis- 
puted books  as  well  as  about  the  disputed  books. 
He  makes  a  specific  promise  to  mention  what  they 
have  said  about  the  Four  Gospels.^  But  of  any  such 
inquiries  as  those  I  have  suggested  about  the  Gospel 
of  John,  of  any  such  explanation  as  those  inquiries 
must  have  drawn  out,  he  says  nothing. 

V. 

That  this  Gospel  would  have  been  received  by  the 
Church  without  controversy,  if  it  had  appeared  twenty 
or  thirty  years  after  the  death  of  John,  is  incredible, 
v>'hen  we  consider  the  contents  of  the  Gospel  itself 


'  Ecdcsiastiuil  Ilislory,  book  iii.,  cap.  xxiv. 
L.  C.  i 


114  EUSEBIUS. 

and  the  controversies  by  which  the  Church  was 
harassed  throughout  the  second  century.  Gnosticism 
destroyed  the  power  of  the  Gospel  by  changing  it 
into  a  philosophy.  By  those  who  were  contending 
earnestly  for  "  the  faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the 
saints,"  it  was  regarded  with  intense  hostility.  But 
among  the  technical  words  of  this  formidable  heresy 
are  the  very  words  which  hold  so  conspicuous  a  place 
in  John's  Gospel,  "  Only  Begotten,"  "  Life,"  "  Truth," 
•■'  Grace,"  "  Fulness,"  "  the  Word,"  "  Light."  Did  the 
Gnostics  get  these  words  from  John  ?  or  did  the  un- 
known writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  get  them  from  the 
Gnostics  ?  The  words  are  just  as  characteristic  of 
the  Gospel  attributed  to  John  as  of  the  system  taught 
by  Valentinus  the  Gnostic,  though  in  John  they  have 
a  different  power.  Who  used  them  first,  the  writer 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  or  Valentinus  ? 

If  the  Fourth  Gospel  had  appeared  for  the  first  time 
at  any  date  after  120  A.D.,  what  chance  would  it 
have  had  of  being  received  by  those  who  were  fight- 
ing Gnosticism  as  the  deadly  foe  of  the  Christian 
Church  ?  To  take  a  parallel  case,  suggested  by  Pro- 
fessor Salmon,  of  Dublin '  :  suppose  that  when  the 
controversy  of  the  Reformation  was  at  the  hottest, 
it    had    been    announced    that    the    manuscript    of 

'  "You  miglit  as  well  conceive  some  one  who  wanted  a  docu- 
ment to  be  accepted  as  authoritative  by  us  Protestants  stuffing 
it  with  Roman  Catholic  technical  words,  transubstantiation, 
purgatory,  and  such  like." — S.\LMON  :  Historical  Introduction 
to  the  New  I'csiamcnty  p.  71  (fast  edition). 


EUSEBIUS.  n-: 


an  Epistle  of  Paul,  previously  unknown,  had  just 
been  discovered  in  some  ancient  library  ;  suppose 
that  when  the  manuscript  was  published,  it  was  found 
to  be  full  of  such  words  as  "  transubstantiation," 
"  purgatory,"  "  indulgences,"  would  not  every  Protes- 
tant have  rejected  it  as  a  forgery  ?  Suppose  that  the 
Epistle  had  been  published  and  accepted  as  genuine 
ten,  twenty,  thirty  years  before  Luther  nailed  his 
theses  to  the  door  of  the  church  at  Wittenberg,  would 
not  the  outbreak  of  the  Reformation  have  provoked 
a  fierce  controversy  concerning  its  genuineness  ? 

If  the  Fourth  Gospel  had  appeared  as  late  as  120 
A.D.,  when  Gnosticism  was  becoming  very  powerful, 
the  Churches  which  held  fast  the  traditional  faith 
would  never  have  acknowledged  its  authority.  If  at 
that  date  it  had  been  only  recently  received  as  the 
work  of  an  apostle — received  within  the  previous 
twenty  years,  and  received  on  inadequate  evidence — 
its  authority  would  certainly  have  been  challenged, 
and  some  trace  of  the  controversy  would  certainly 
have  survived. 

But  I  repeat  that,  in  the  Christian  writings  of  the 
second  century  which  are  in  our  own  hands,  there  is 
no  trace  of  any  controversy  on  the  genuineness  of 
John's  Gospel  ;  and  the  silence  of  Eusebius  assures 
us  that  there  ws.s  no  trace  of  any  controversy  on  this 
subject  in  the  Christian  writings,  now  lost,  which  he 
found  in  the  library  of  his  friend  Pamphilus,  or  in 
the  library  of  Bishop  Alexander  at  Jerusalem.  The 
inference  seems  to  me  irresistible.     There  was  never 


Ii6  EUSEBIUS. 

any  controversy  concerning  the  genuineness  of  the 
Gospel  of  John  because  there  was  never  any  uncer- 
tainty about  it ;  and  there  was  never  any  uncertainty 
about  it  because  it  was  published  in  John's  lifetin:ic, 
and  all  John's  friends  knew  that  it  was  his.^ 

'  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  the  argument  in  this 
Lecture  was  suggested  by  Dr.  Lightfoot's  remarkable  chapter  on 
"  The  Silence  of  Euscbius  "  in  his  Essays  en  a  Work  entitled 
" Siipeniatiifal Religion"  ;  and  the  notes  to  the  lecture  indicate 
how  much  I  am  indebted  to  it.  But  the  argument  is  not 
identical  with  that  of  Dr.  Lightfoot,  and  I  must  not  make  his 
great  name  responsible  for  it. 


LECTURE  VII. 
CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA   AND   TERTULLTAN. 

THAT  at  the  close  of  the  second  century  all 
Christian  Churches  received  our  Four  Gospels 
as  the  authoritative  records  of  the  earthly  Life  and 
Ministry  of  our  Lord  is  not  contested  by  any  school 
of  criticism.  Nor  is  it  contested  that,  at  that  time, 
these  Four  Gospels  were  universally  attributed  to 
Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  To  ourselves  this 
is  a  fact  of  immense  importance. 

I. 

For  when  we  look  back  to  the  early  days  of  the 
Christian  Faith,  to  the  times  when  men  were  still 
living  who  had  seen  and  heard  the  writers  of  our 
sacred  books,  had  received  the  Christian  Gospel  from 
their  teaching,  had  known  them  as  their  personal 
friends,  had  talked  with  them  in  private  about  the 
miracles  of  Christ,  His  discourses.  His  sufferings,  and 
His  resurrection,  the  distance  seems  immense.  The 
imagination  is  oppressed  by  the  intervening  centuries. 
How  can  we  make  our  way  through  all  the  confusions 
and   uncertainties   of  this   vast  tract  of  time  ?      lUit 

i'7 


Il8  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 

of  these  eighteen  hundred  years,  we  can  pass  over 
seventeen  hundred  at  a  single  stride.  We  have  in 
our  hands  the  writings  of  Irenc-eus  of  Lyons,  of 
TertulHan  of  Carthage,  of  Clement  and  Origcn  ^  of 
Alexandria  ;  and  they  attribute  the  Four  Gospels  to 
the  same  authors  to  whom  we  attribute  them  ;  they 
regard  them  with  the  same  reverence.  Is  it  possible 
to  believe  that  this  general  consent  rested  on  no  solid 
foundations  ? 

Let  the  question  be  put  in  another  form,  a  form 
suggested  by  the  latest  account  that  has  been  given 
of  these  sacred  books  by  those  who  deny  that  they 
are  genuine.  At  the  close  of  the  second  centur}'  these 
four  narratives  had  secured  in  all  Christian  Churches 
a  place  as  great,  as  authoritative,  as  sacred,  as  that 
which  they  hold  now  :  is  it  possible  to  belic\e  that 
they  could  have  won  this  universal  recognition  if 
they  had  been  written  by  unknown  men,  in  unknown 
places,  at  unknown  times,  during  the  first  half  of  that 

'  The  late  Dr.  Tregelles,an  eminent  and  most  painstaking  New 
Testament  scholar,  says  of  Origcn,  who  was  born  in  AD.  185 
and  died  in  A.D.  254  :  '*  In  his  writings  he  makes  such  extensive 
use  of  the  New  Testament,  that,  although  a  very  large  number 
of  his  works  are  lost,  and  many  others  have  come  down  to  us 
only  in  defective  Latin  versions,  we  can  in  his  extant  Greek 
writings  alone  (I  speak  tiiis  from  actual  knowledge  and  exami- 
nation) find  cited  at  least  two-thirds  of  the  New  Testament  ;  so 
that  had  such  a  thing  been  permitted  as  that  the  Gospels  and 
some  of  the  other  books  should  have  been  lost,  we  might  restore 
them  in  a  great  measure  by  means  of  the  quotations  in  Origen." 
—Led lire  on  the  Historic  Evidence  of  the  Authorship  and 
Transmission  of  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament  (1853),  p.  14. 


AND    TERTULLIAN.  119 


same  century,  and  after  all  the  apostles  and  all  who 
belonged  to  the  first  generation  of  Christians  were 
dead  ?  There  are  two  considerations  which  make  it 
infinitely  improbable :  i,  The  ivide  area  over  which, 
in  very  early  times,  Christian  Churches  were  planted  ; 
and,  3,  Their  inutiial  independence  of  each  other. 

I.  Within  thirty  years  after  the  death  of  our  Lord 
there  were  Churches  in  Jerusalem,  in  Carsarea,  in  the 
Syrian  Antioch,  and  in  Rome.  There  were  Churches 
in  the  heart  of  Asia  Minor  and  in  the  great  cities  on 
the  coast.  There  were  Churches  in  Philippi,  Thessa- 
lonica,  and  Corinth.  Our  materials  for  constructing 
the  history  of  the  diffusion  of  the  Christian  Faith 
during  the  next  forty  years  are  inconsiderable  ;  but 
early  in  the  second  century  we  find  that  there  were 
large  numbers  of  Christians  in  the  north  of  Asia 
Minor.  Pliny  had  been  sent  into  the  province  by 
Trajan,  and  he  wrote  to  the  emperor  to  learn  how 
he  is  to  treat  those  who  are  guilty  of  believing  in  this 
strange  superstition.  The  "  crime  "  had  continued  to 
spread  even  while  the  persecution  was  going  on.  If 
he  is  still  to  punish  those  who  persisted  in  it,  he  tells 
the  emperor  that  a  great  number  of  persons  are  in 
danger  of  suffering.  "  For  many  of  all  ages  and  every 
rank,  of  both  sexes  likewise,  are  accused,  and  will  be 
accused.  Nor  has  the  contagion  of  this  superstition 
seized  cities  only,  but  the  lesser  towns  also  and  the 
open  country."  Pliny  thinks  that  by  a  wise  policy  it 
may  be  restrained  and  corrected.  "  It  is  certain," 
he  says,  "  that  the  temples,  which  were  almost  for- 


CLEMENT  OE  ALEXANDRIA 


sakcn,  begin  to  be  more  frequented.  And  the  sacred 
solemnities,  after  a  long-  intermission,  are  revived. 
Victims  likewise  are  everywhere  bought  up,  whereas 
for  some  time  there  were  few  purchasers."  He  thinks 
that  many  "  might  be  reclaimed  if  pardon  were 
granted  to  those  \\\\o  shall  repent."  That  letter 
was  written  before  A.D.  105.  Fifty  years  later  the 
Christian  Gospel  had  spread  so  widely,  that  Justin,  in 
his  Dialogue  with  Trvpho  says,  "  There  exists  not  a 
people,  whether  Greek  or  barbarian  or  any  other  race 
of  men,  by  whatsoever  appellation  they  may  be  dis- 
tinguished, whether  they  dwell  under  tents  or  wander 
about  in  covered  wagons,  among  whom  prayers  are 
not  offered  in  the  name  of  the  crucified  Jesus  to  the 
Father  and  Creator  of  all  things."  Gibbon,  who 
quotes  the  passage,  has  no  doubt  a  right  to  call  it 
"  a  splendid  exaggeration,  which  even  at  present  it 
would  be  extremely  difficult  to  reconcile  with  the 
real  state  of  mankind  "  ;  but  Justin  would  hardly  have 
ventured  on  so  glowing  a  statement,  if  it  had  not  been 
notorious  that  the  new  Faith  had  won  great  triumphs 
in  many  remote  parts  of  the  world.  Indeed,  we 
know,  from  other  sources,  that  before  the  middle  of 
the  second  century  there  were  Christian  Churches  in 
nearly  all  the  provinces  of  the  empire. 

2.  These  Churches  were  not  under  any  central 
authority.  The  Apostle  Paul,  during  his  lifetime, 
maintained  a  vigilant  supervision  over  the  Churches 
which  he  had  founded  in  Asia  and  in  Europe  ;  but 
he  died  more  than  thirty  years  before  the  end  of  the 


AND    TERTULLIAN. 


first  century.  John  must  have  exerted  an  infimens2 
influence  over  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  but  he 
died  about  the  beginning  of  the  second  century. 
The  age  of  general  councils  had  not  come.  As  yet 
the  bishop  of  Rome  was  not  the  ruler  of  Western 
Christendom.  The  Churches  stood  apart.  They 
had  friendly  relations  with  each  other,  but  they  were 
not  bound  together  in  one  great  ecclesiastical  organi- 
zation. No  theologian,  in  the  second  century,  rose  to 
the  ascendency,  which  belonged  to  Augustine  in  the 
fifth.  Ancient  Churches,  founded  by  apostles,  were 
regarded  with  reverence,  and  the  Roman  Church  had 
the  additional  influence  derived  from  its  position  in 
the  imperial  city ;  but  neither  Antioch  nor  Rome 
had  authority  over  the  rest  of  Christendom.  The 
Churches  followed  their  own  traditions  ;  if  they  modi- 
fied them,  it  was  in  fraternal  deference  to  Churches 
which  they  believed  had  been  more  faithful  to  the 
apostolic  rule — not  in  forced  submission  to  any  ex- 
ternal authority.  Towards  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury there  was  a  sharp  controversy  between  the  East 
and  the  West  on  the  observance  of  Easter. 

How  then  are  we  to  explain  the  fact  that,  man)- 
years  before  200  A.D.,  all  these  Churches — Churches 
composed  of  men  of  different  races.  Churches  separated 
from  each  other  by  mountains  and  seas.  Churches  in 
Rome  and  Churches  in  Asia  Minor,  Churches  in  Gaul 
and  Churches  in  Northern  Africa— received  the  Four 
Gospels  as  sacred  Scriptures,  and  believed  that  they 
were  written  by  Matthew,   Mark,   Luke,  and  John  ? 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 


I  repeat  that  no  great  theologian,  whose  fame  ex- 
tended from  the  East  to  the  West,  drew  these  remote 
and  independent  societies  into  agreement.  Difference 
of  judgment  was  not  suppressed,  consent  was  not  com- 
pelled by  the  canon  of  a  council  or  by  the  authority 
of  a  pope.     How  came  the  Churches  to  agree  ? 

There  can,  I  think,  be  only  one  answer  to  this 
question.  The  Gospels  must  have  been  written  and 
received  before  the  first  generation  of  Christians  had 
wholly  passed  away.  Had  any  of  them  appeared 
for  the  first  time  at  a  later  date,  ancient  Churches 
which  had  been  founded  by  apostles  would  have 
refused  to  acknowledge  them.  If,  here  and  there,  a 
Church  had  been  deceived.  Churches  elsewhere  would 
have  protested  against  the  fraud.  The  universal 
reception  of  the  Gospels  before  200  A.D.  is  a  proof 
that  they  could  not  have  been  written  by  unknown 
authors  between  100  A.D.  and  150  A.D. 

H. 

From  the  argument  resting  on  the  general  consent 
of  the  Churches  at  the  close  of  the  second  century,  I 
pass  to  the  consideration  of  the  value  of  the  special 
evidence  which  is  given  by  two  eminent  men  of 
that  age — Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Tcrtullian  of 
Carthage.  The  two  men,  in  their  intellectual  and 
religious  life,  were  extremely  unlike  ;  and  they  repre- 
sent Christian  communities  having  very  different 
characteristics  and  very  different  traditions. 

The  city  of  Alexandria  had  long  been  famous  for 


AND    TERTULLIAN.  123 

its  immense  Library,  the  literary  glory  of  the  ancient 
world  ;  and  for  its  Museum — or,  as  we  should  say, 
its  University — in  which  crowds  of  students  from 
distant  countries  listened  to  illustrious  professors 
whose  names  have  not  yet  perished.  The  general 
population  consisted  of  men  of  all  races,  and  the 
Alexandrian  schools  were  hospitable  to  the  learning 
and  speculation  of  all  lands.  It  was  there  that  the 
bold  attempt  was  made  to  blend  and  to  fuse  Greek 
and  Oriental  thought,  and  to  discover  in  the  books 
of  Moses  the  last  and  highest  results  of  the  philo- 
sophy of  Paganism.  Literature,  grammar,  criticism  ; 
mathematics,  astronomy,  medicine — whatever  a  man 
cared  to  study,  he  could  study  under  great  masters 
and  in  company  with  enthusiastic  comrades. 

As  early  as  the  beginning  of  the  second  century 
the  number  of  Christians  in  the  city  was  very  large  ; 
among  them  Rasilides  and  Valentinus,  and  other 
teachers  of  Gnosticism,  found  some  of  their  earliest 
adherents.  The  Christian  Church  caught  the  Alex- 
andrian spirit.  Towards  the  end  of  the  century  the 
great  Christian  school  of  Alexandria,  the  Catechetical 
School,  became  the  centre  of  the  intellectual  assault 
of  the  Church  on  the  thought  of  the  pagan  world. 
The  school  was  open  from  morning  to  night,  without 
charge,  to  men  and  women  alike.  Where  the  intel- 
lectual life  of  the  world  was  keenest,  most  intense, 
most  adventurous.  Christian  scholars  determined  with 
intrepid  confidence  to  demonstrate  the  transcendent 
glory  of  the  wisdom  revealed  to  the  world  in  Christ. 


124  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 

Nor  were  their  resources  unequal  to  their  task.  Over 
this  school  Clement  presided  for  about  thirteen  years 
(a.d.  190-203). 

It  is  probable,  though  not  certain,  that  he  was 
educated  at  Athens,  which  still  preserved  in  the 
second  century  some  tradition  of  its  ancient  intel- 
lectual supremacy  ;  and  there  are  expressions  of  his 
from  which  it  has  been  inferred  that  in  his  early  life 
he  was  a  heathen.  The  nobler  forms  of  heathen 
thought  had  a  strong  attraction  for  him,  and  it  was 
by  no  sudden  movement  that  he  reached  perfect  rest 
in  the  Christian  Faith.  For  Clement,  even  when  he 
has  become  master  of  the  great  Christian  school  at 
Alexandria,  Plato  sometimes  speaks  "as  if  divinely 
inspired."  ^  He  believes  that,  as  God  is  the  Author 
of  all  good  things,  God  had  given  philosophy  to  the 
Greeks  as  He  had  given  the  law  to  the  Jews,  as  a 
discipline  of  righteousness,  as  a  schoolmaster  to  bring 
them  to  Christ.  Perhaps  too — it  was  possible — the 
gift  came  direct  from  the  Father  of  all,  and  by  the 
immediate  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit  i^  or  if  the 
philosophers  had  derived  their  best  knowledge  from 
Hebrew  prophets,  they  were  but  like  Prometheus, 
who  stole  fire  from  heaven  for  the  service  of  men  : 
the  light  and  fire  were  from  God,  by  whatsoever 
means  they  were  obtained.-' 

He  was  clearly  a  man   of  wide   and   active   intel- 


'  Stroma! a,  book  i.,  cap.  viii. 
Ibiil.,  book  i.,  cap.  v.  «  //;/;/.,  book  i  ,  cap.  .\vii. 


AND    TERTULLIAN. 


ligence.  His  sympathies  were  generous.  We  are 
separated  from  him  by  seventeen  hundred  years  ;  but 
he  often  thinks  the  thoughts  which  we  are  incHned 
to  regard  as  the  best  results  of  modern  Hfe  and 
speculation.  He  was  a  man  of  large  learning  ;  ^  he 
was  an  eminent  teacher  in  a  learned  Church  ;  he 
lived  in  a  learned  city.  That  such  a  man,  living  and 
teaching  within  a  hundred  years  after  the  death  of 
the  last  of  the  apostles,  received  our  Four  Gospels  as 
authentic  and  genuine,  that  he  never  suspected  that 
they  had  been  written  long  after  the  writers  to  whom 
they  are  attributed  were  dead,  is  in  itself  a  strong 
reason  for  believing  that,  at  the  close  of  the  second 
century,  the  tradition  which  supported  their  genuine- 
ness and  authenticity  was  ancient,  universal,  and 
decisive. 

To  give  a  list  of  the  quotations  from  the  Four 
Gospels  which  occur  in  Clement's  writings,  in  order 
to  prove  that  he  acknowledges  their  authority,  is 
v/holly  unnecessary,  as  unnecessary  as  it  would  be 
to  offer  similar  proof  that  their  authority  is  acknow- 
ledged by  Mr.  Spurgcon  or  Canon  Liddon.  But  it 
may  be  well  to  show  that  he  did  not  accept  the 
authority,  either  of  the  Gospels  or  of  the  other 
canonical    Scriptures,   without    inquiry.       In    a   lost 

^  "  No  heathen  contemporary  shows  such  a  power  of  memory 
or  so  wide  an  acquaintance  with  the  classical  literature  of 
Greece  in  all  its  branches  as  Clement  of  Alexandria." — LlGHT- 
I'OO  r  :  Essays  on  a  Work  entitled  "  Supcniatural  Religion," 
p.  269. 


126  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 

work  of  his — Hypotyposcs — he  collected  the  results 
of  his  investigations  ;  some  passages  have  been  pre- 
served. In  this  work,  says  Eusebius,  Clement  gives 
the  tradition  respecting  the  order  of  the  Gospels, 
as  derived  from  the  oldest — or  original — presbyters. 
"  He  says  that  those  which  contain  the  genealogies 
were  written  first ;  but  that  the  Gospel  of  Mark  was 
occasioned  in  the  following  manner :  '  When  Peter 
had  proclaimed  the  word  publicly  at  Rome,  and 
declared  the  Gospel  under  the  influence  of  the  Spirit, 
as  there  was  a  great  number  present,  they  requested 
Mark,  who  had  followed  him  from  afar,  and  remem- 
bered well  what  he  had  said,  to  reduce  these  things 
to  writing  ;  and  that,  after  composing  the  Gospel,  he 
gave  it  to  those  who  requested  it  of  him,  which,  when 
Peter  understood,  he  directly  neither  hindered  nor 
encouraged  it.  But  John,  last  of  all,  perceiving  that 
what  had  reference  to  the  body  in  the  Gospel  of  our 
Saviour  "  (that  is,  to  the  earthly  and  human  side  of 
our  Lord's  life  and  work)  "  was  sufficiently  detailed, 
and  being  encouraged  by  his  familiar  friends  and 
urged  by  the  Spirit,  he  wrote  a  spiritual  Gospel."  ^ 
He  disputes  the  authenticity  of  a  saying  attributed 
to  our  Lord,  because,  though  it  is  contained  in  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  P^gyptians — an  apocryphal 
Gospel — it  is  not  to  be  found  in  "  any  of  the  Four 
Gospels  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us."  ^ 


*  Eusebius,  Ecclesiastical  History^  book  vi.,  cap.  xiv, 

*  S(roin>ita,  book  iii.,  cap.  xiii. 


AND    TERTULLIAN.  127 


There  is  another  point  to  be  considered  in  con- 
nexion with  the  testimony  of  Clement.  He  tells  us 
that  he  wrote  his  Strouiata  as  memoranda  for  his 
old  age,  that  he  might  not  forget  the  vigorous  and 
animated  discourses  which  he  had  heard  in  early 
manhood  from  blessed  and  truly  remarkable  men, 
who  had  preserved  the  tradition  of  the  Faith  derived 
directly  from  the  holy  apostles  Peter,  James,  John, 
and  Paul.  It  was  God's  will,  he  says,  that  the  truth 
should  be  transmitted  from  its  original  teachers  as 
from  father  to  son,  though  few  of  the  sons  were 
equal  to  their  fathers.  He  had  met  the  men  from 
whom  he  had  received  the  tradition  in  Greece,  in 
Italy,  and  in  the  East.  One  was  from  Egypt; 
another  was  a  Christian  Jew  whom  he  found  in 
Palestine ;  another  was  born  in  Assyria ;  another 
the  greatest  of  them  all — probably  Pant.xMius — he 
found  in  Egypt ;  and  it  was  when  he  found  the  last 
that  his  mind  and  heart  reached  their  final  rest  in 
Christ.  Through  channels  so  various  the  beliefs  of 
an  earlier  generation  had  reached  him.  It  is  hard 
to  imagine  that  men  who  represented  countries  so 
remote,  and  lines  of  tradition  which  for  two  or  three 
generations  had  been  independent  of  each  other, 
could  have  agreed  to  treat  the  Gospels  as  having 
been  written  by  the  authors  whose  names  they  bear, 
if  these  names  had  been  attributed  to  forgeries  pro- 
duced long  after  the  apostles  and  all  their  contem- 
poraries had  passed  away. 


128  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 

III. 

From  Alexandria  we  pass  to  another  great  African 
city.  The  city  of  Carthage,  after  its  restoration 
under  Caesar  and  Augustus,  rose  with  extraordinary 
rapidity  to  great  wealth  and  splendour.  It  was 
inhabited  by  a  mixed  population,  composed,  partly, 
of  the  descendants  of  the  ancient  Phoenician  settlers, 
who  in  early  times  had  raised  their  republic  to  a 
greatness  which  disputed  the  power  of  Rome ;  partly 
of  Roman  colonists  ;  partly  of  strangers  from  many 
lands,  drawn  to  the  city  by  its  immense  commercial 
prosperity.  The  external  forms  of  its  civilization 
were  derived  from  Rome.  It  became  famous  for  its 
schools  of  rhetoric  and  of  Roman  law.  But  in  the 
religious  faith  of  the  people  there  were  deep  traces 
of  the  Phoenician  origin  of  the  ancient  Carthage, 
and  their  temper  was  as  fierce  as  the  heat  of  the 
African  deserts. 

The  Carthaginian  Church  shared  the  intellectual 
and  moral  characteristics  of  the  city.  Intellectually 
it  was  Roman,  not  Oriental ;  practical,  not  specula- 
tive. Its  temper  was  rigid  and  intolerant.  It  was 
capable  of  the  most  violent  and  passionate  en- 
thusiasm; and,  in  the  person  of  its  sterner  sons, 
capable,  too,  of  an  heroic  fidelity  to  Christ  under 
prolonged  and  cruel  sufferings.  But  when  times  of 
persecution  came,  many  of  its  fanatical  members 
proved  inferior  in  constancy  and  fortitude  to  Christian 
men  in  other  Churches,  who  were  less  ostentatious  in 


AND    TER7ULLIAN.  129 

their  professions  of  devotion  to  the  Faith,  and  less 
intolerant  in  their  denunciations  of  heathenism. 

Of  the  strength  and  the  limitations  of  this  great 
Church  Tertullian  is  the  most  illustrious  represen- 
tative. He  was  born  in  Carthage  between  150  and 
160  A.D.  He  belonged  to  a  good  family,  and  received 
an  excellent  education.  Philosophy,  history,  rhetoric, 
and  law  were  the  subjects  which  had  the  strongest 
attractions  for  him.  His  parents  were  heathen,  and 
he  was  more  than  thirty  years  of  age — perhaps  forty 
— when  he  received  the  Christian  Gospel.  He  soon 
gave  proof  of  the  vehemence  of  his  zeal  and  the 
energy  and  fertility  of  his  intellect ;  fifteen  or  six- 
teen of  his  books — some  of  them  apologetic,  others 
controversial,  others  moral  and  ascetic — were  written 
within  seven  years  after  his  conversion. 

Even  these  early  writings  were  marked  by  great 
moral  austerity.  According  to  Tertullian,  it  was  a 
crime  for  a  Christian  man  to  give  any  sanction,  direct 
or  indirect,  to  idolatry;  for  idolatry  is  the  supreme 
sin,  and  includes  all  others:  it  is  murder,  adultery, 
blasphemy.  It  was  therefore  a  crime  to  witness  the 
performances  in  the  theatre  and  the  circus,  for  all 
public  amusements  were  associated  with  honours 
paid  to  the  gods.  It  was  a  crime  to  have  friend  1}- 
relations  with  people  who  were  in  the  habit  of 
witnessing  these  performances.  To  share  in  the 
observance  of  the  holy  days  of  the  heathen  was 
also  a  crime.  On  some  of  these  days  it  was  a 
national    custom    to    pay   debts ;  on    others   to   give 

L.  c.  9 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 


presents ;  Tertullian  contended  that  a  Christian  man 
should  carefully  avoid  conforming  to  the  custom  ; 
let  him  pay  his  debts  and  give  his  presents  on  days 
which  were  not  devoted  to  the  gods.  To  manu- 
facture idols  or  to  sell  them  was,  of  course,  a  crime. 
To  traffic  in  any  articles  used  in  heathen  worship 
was  a  crime.  Magistrates  had  to  discharge  certain 
functions  in  relation  to  heathen  temples  ;  a  Christian 
man  could  not  therefore  be  a  magistrate.  School- 
masters had  to  teach  their  scholars  the  heathen 
mythology,  and  to  take  part  in  school  festivals  which 
were  held  in  honour  of  the  gods  ;  the  very  first  pay- 
ment of  every  pupil  they  consecrated  to  the  honour 
of  Minerva.  To  be  a  schoolmaster  was  therefore  not 
consistent  with  lo)'alty  to  Christ.^ 

It  is  apparent  from  the  tone  and  temper  of  Ter- 
tullian's  denunciations  that  there  were  large  numbers 
of  baptized  persons  in  Carthage  who  listened  to  this 
stern  teaching  either  with  indifference  or  with  resent- 
ment. When  he  reached  middle  life  he  turned  in 
despair  from  what  he  regarded  as  the  hopeless  cor- 


'  liut  Tertullian  was  obliged  to  ndiiiit  that  Christians  could 
not  dispense  with  that  general  culture  which  was  needful  both 
for  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  intercourse  of  daily  life, 
lie  therefore  sanctioned  the  attendance  of  Christian  children 
at  heathen  schools,  if  they  could  obtain  a  literary  education  in 
no  other  way;  and  he  trusted  to  the  influence  of  the  Church  and 
the  home  to  protect  them  against  the  contagion  of  heathenism. 
The  scholars  could  avoid  taking  part  in  heathen  festivals  more 
easily  than  the  teachers.  Sec  Nf.axder  :  .■lnlig?iostikiis,\>-xx\. 
i.,  section  i. 


AND    rERTUIJ.IAN.  131 


ruption  of  the  catholic  Church — the  luxur)',  covc- 
tousness,  cowardice,  worldliness  of  both  its  clergy  and 
laity — and  trusted  that  he  had  found  among  the 
Montanists  the  lost  ideal  of  the  perfect  life. 

From  this  time  his  moral  teaching  became  still 
more  austere.  The  Christians  in  Carthage  were 
menaced  with  persecution.  Was  it  lawful  to  escape 
persecution  by  flight?  To  Tertullian,  who  believed 
that  the  voice  of  the  Spirit  was  heard  through  the 
prophets  of  Montanism,  the  answer  was  clear ;  for 
the  prophets  incited  men  to  offer  themselves 
for  martyrdom.  "Why,"  they  asked,  "should  you 
be  ashamed  of  gaining  glory?  The  opportunity  is 
offered  you  when  you  are  in  peril  of  suffering  for  the 
name  of  Christ.  He  who  is  not  exposed  to  dis- 
honour before  men  will  be  exposed  to  dishonour 
before  the  Lord.  Seek  not  to  die  on  your  beds 
from  disease,  but  to  die  the  martyr's  death,  that  He 
may  be  glorified  who  suffered  for  you."  The  soul 
of  Tertullian  vibrated  to  that  iron  string.  "  More 
glorious,"  he  exclaims,  "  is  the  soldier  pierced  with 
the  javelin  in  battle  than  he  who  has  a  safe  skin  as 
a  fugitive."  To  purchase  safety  with  money  was  as 
shameful  as  to  flee.  The  Christian  man  had  been 
ransomed  by  Christ  from  the  spirits  of  wickedness, 
from  the  darkness  of  this  life,  from  eternal  judgment, 
from  everlasting  death;  "but  jw^  bargain  for  him  with 
an  informer,  or  a  soldier,  or  some  paltry  thief  of  a 
ruler — under,  as  they  say,  the  folds  of  the  tunic* — as 


'  lie  means  that  the  necrotiation  was  clandestine. 


CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 


if  lie  were  stolen  goods  whom  Christ  purchased  in  the 
face  of  the  whole  world — yes,  and  set  at  liberty." 
No  doubt  Christ  had  said  to  the  apostles  that,  when 
they  were  persecuted  in  one  city,  they  were  to  flee  to 
another ;  but  they  were  to  flee,  not  to  insure  their 
own  safety,  but  because  the  work  they  had  to  do  was 
urgent  and  the  time  was  short :  "  ye  shall  not  have 
eone  through  the  cities  of  Israel  till  the  Son  of  man 
be  come." 

The  same  austerity  and  sternness  that  he  showed 
in  his  discussion  of  Christian  ethics,  and  in  his  de- 
nunciations of  clergy  and  laity  who  lived  by  a  less 
severe  rule  than  his  own,  appear  in  his  treatment  of 
heathenism.  He  hates  it,  scorns  it,  assaults  it  with 
incessant  sarcasm  and  invective.  In  his  Apology, 
which  is  one  of  his  earliest  writings,  there  are  many 
characteristic  passages.  The  heathen,  he  says, 
falsely  charged  the  Christian  with  shameful  crimes. 
I  will  show  you,  retorts  Tcrtullian,  that  practices, 
open  or  secret,  prevail  among  yourselves,  which  per- 
haps have  rendered  it  possible  for  you  to  believe  that 
similar  enormities  are  committed  by  us.  You  attri- 
bute to  your  gods  the  most  horrible  offences  ;  and 
those  who  worship  them  do  the  same  things.  He 
recites  with  a  fierce  fidelity  the  deeds  of  cruelty  and 
of  lust,  which  he  declares  were  common  in  heathen 
nations.  And  he  adds,  with  bitter  iron}-,  that  human 
goodness  was  an  insult  to  the  divinities.  "  Deify 
your  vilest  criminals,  if  you  wish  to  please  your 
gods." 


AND    TERTULLIAN.  133 

Clement  of  Alexandria  was  eager  to  find  in  hea- 
then thought  anticipations  of  the  Christian  Gospel  ; 
he  looked  into  the  abysses  of  heathen  darkness  with 
the  hope  of  discovering  some  rays,  however  faint,  of 
the  "light  which  lighteth  every  man."  Tertullian 
poured  upon  heathenism  a  fiery  stream  of  insult 
and  hatred.  The  contrast  between  the  two  men  is 
complete.  In  their  temperament  and  in  their  methods 
of  thought  they  were  as  far  from  each  other  as  the 
east  is  from  the  west.  But  they  were  agreed  in  their 
reverence  for  the  Four  Gospels. 

On  what  ground  Tertullian  rested  his  belief  in  their 
authority  is  shown  in  the  following  passage,  taken 
from  his  treatise  against  Marcion  : 

"  If  it  is  acknowledged  that  that  is  more  true  which  is  more 
ancient,  that  more  ancient  which  is  even  from  the  beginning,  that 
from  the  beginning  which  is  from  the  apostles,  it  will  in  like 
manner  assuredly  be  acknowledged  that  that  has  been  derived 
by  tradition  froni  the  apostles  which  has  been  preserved  invio- 
late in  the  Churches  of  the  apostles.  Let  us  see  what  milk  the 
Corinthians  drank  from  Paul  ;  to  what  rule  the  Galatians  were 
recalled  by  his  reproofs  ;  what  is  read  l.)y  the  Philippians,  the 
Thessalonians,  the  Ephesians  ;  what  is  the  testimony  of  the 
Romans,  who  are  nearest  to  us,  to  whom  Peter  and  Paul  left  the 
Gospel,  and  that  sealed  by  their  own  blood.  We  have,  moreover, 
Churches  founded  by  John.  I'or  even  if  IMarcion  rejects  his  Apo- 
calypse, still  the  succession  of  bishops  [in  the  seven  Churches], 
if  traced  to  its  source,  will  rest  on  the  authority  of  John.  And 
the  noble  descent  of  other  Churches  is  recognised  in  the  same 
manner.  I  say  then  that  among  them,  and  not  only  among  the 
apostolic  Churches,  but  among  all  the  Churches  which  are 
united  with  lliem  in  Christian  fellowship,  that  Gospel  of  Luke 
which  we  earnestly  defend  has  been  maintained  from  its  first 
publication." 


131  CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA 

"The  same  authority  of  the  apostolic  Churches  will  uphold 
the  other  Gospels  which  we  have  in  due  succession  through 
them  and  according  to  their  usage,  I  mean  those  of  [the  apos- 
tles] Matthew  and  John  ;  although  that  which  was  published  by 
Mark  may  also  be  maintained  to  be  Peter's,  whose  interpreter 
Mark  was  :  for  the  narrative  of  Luke  also  is  generally  ascribed 
to  Paul,  [since]  it  is  allowable  that  that  which  scholars  publish 
should  be  regarded  as  their  master's  work."' ' 

Tertullian's  contention  is  reasonable.  The  Churches 
which  apostles  had  founded  preserved  the  writings 
of  their  apostolic  foundei"s.  The  Churches  of  Thes- 
salonica,  Corinth,  Ephesus  preserved  Paul's  Epistles 
to  the  first  generation  of  Christians  in  those  cities. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  full  of  sharp  rebuke  to 
the  men  who  received  the  Gospel  of  Paul  wath  such 
enthusiasm  that  they  would  have  plucked  out  their 
c)-es  for  him,  but  who  within  a  year  or  two  were 
listening  to  "  another  Gospel,"  which  was  not  a  Gospel 
at  all,  was  preserved  by  the  Churches  of  Galatia. 
The  Roman  Church  preserved  Paul's  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.  The  Churches  founded  by  John  preserved 
the  writings  of  John.  All  the  Four  Gospels — and 
especially  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  with  which  in  his 
controversy  with  Marcion  Tertullian  was  more  im- 
mediately concerned — had  been  handed  down  in  the 
same  waj'.  The  sacred  books  were  in  the  keeping 
of  organized  societies,  whose  members  regarded  them 
as  the  authoritati\c  records  of  a  Divine  revelation  — 


'  Ajiainsl  Marcion,  iv.  5,  Dr.  Westcott's  translation  ;  Canon 
of  New  Tcs/aiiicnf.  pp.  315,  3.'/). 


AND    TERTULLIAN. 


a  revelation  which  was  the  law  of  their  earthly  con- 
duct and  the  foundation  of  their  immortal  hopes.  It 
is  irrelevant  to  say  that  Tertullian,  though  a  man  of 
powerful  intellect,  had  no  faculty  for  literary  criticism. 
Our  contention  is,  not  that  he  was  a  great  literary 
critic,  and  that  therefore  we  ought  to  accept  his  judg- 
ment on  the  authority  and  genuineness  of  the  Four 
Gospels,  but  that  he  is  a  witness  to  the  great  place 
in  the  thought  and  the  life  of  the  Church  which  the 
Gospels  held  before  the  close  of  the  second  century. 
For  this  fact  the  evidence  contained  in  his  writings 
is  decisive.* 


'  See  Appendix,  Note  B. 


LECTURE    VIII. 

JREN.-EUS. 

UNDER  the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius — a  philo- 
sopher among  emperors,  a  saint  among  philo- 
sophers— the  Christians  suffered  cruel  persecution. 
The  general  policy  of  Rome  was  a  policy  of  religious 
toleration  ;  for,  to  quote  the  famous  sentence  of 
Gibbon,  "  the  various  modes  of  worship  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  Roman  world  were  all  considered  by 
the  people  as  equally  true,  by  the  philosopher  as 
equally  false,  and  by  the  magistrates  as  equally  use- 
ful." But  from  this  toleration  the  Christian  Faith, 
which  maintained  an  incessant  and  open  war  against 
all  the  religions  of  the  empire,  was  not  unnaturally 
excluded.  The  hatred  with  which  it  was  regarded 
was  not  always  active,  but  it  never  ceased  to  exist. 
Under  Marcus  Aurelius  it  became  furious. 

He  was  one  of  the  greatest  and  noblest  of  princes. 
He  accepted  the  imperial  dignity  with  reluctance,  and 
cared  nothing  for  the  splendours  of  his  great  position. 
Could  he  have  chosen  for  himself,  he  would  have 
spent  his  years  in  meditation  on  the  mj'stery  and 
glory  of  human  life  and  on  the  ideal  of  human  virtue. 


IREN.EUS.  137 

But  the  sentence  of  Plato  was  always  on  his  lips, 
that  states  would  be  great  and  prosperous  if  their 
philosophers  were  princes,  or  if  their  princes  were 
philosophers  ;  and  he  trusted  that  his  own  philoso- 
phical discipline  had  qualified  him  to  render  service 
to  the  immense  populations  which  were  under  the 
Roman  power. 

The  precepts  which  he  set  down  for  the  conduct 
of  his  own  life  show  that  he  saw  the  moral  perils  of 
his  great  position.  "  Take  care,"  he  writes,  "  that 
thou  art  not  made  into  a  Ca:sar,  that  thou  art  not 
dyed  with  this  dye  ;  for  such  things  happen.  Keep 
thyself  then  simple,  good,  pure,  serious,  free  from 
affectation,  a  friend  of  justice,  a  worshipper  of  the 
gods,  kind,  affectionate,  strenuous  in  all  proper  acts. 
Strive  to  continue  to  be  such  as  philosophy  wished 
to  make  thee.  Reverence  the  gods  and  help  men. 
Short  is  life.  There  is  only  one  fruit  of  this  earthly 
life,  a  pious  disposition  and  social  acts.  Do  every- 
thing as  a  disciple  of  Antoninus.  Remember  his 
constancy  in  every  act  which  was  conformable  to 
reason,  .  .  .  and  his  sweetness,  and  his  disregard 
of  earthly  fame,  and  his  efforts  to  understand  things  ; 

.  .  and  how  he  bore  with  them  that  blamed  him 
unjustly  without  blaming  them  in  return,  how  he 
did  nothing  in  a  hurry,  and  how  he  listened  not  to 
calumnies  ;  .  .  .  and  with  how  little  he  was  satis- 
fied, such  as  lodging,  bed,  dress,  food,  servants  ;  and 
how  laborious  [he  was]  and  patient  ;  .  .  .  and  how 
he  tolerated  freedom  of  speech  in  those  v.'ho  opposed 


138  JRENMUS. 

his  opinions  ;  and  the  pleasure  that  he  had  when  any 
man  showed  him  anything  better  ;  and  how  rehgious 
he  was  without  superstition.  Imitate  all  this,  that 
thou  mayest  have  as  good  a  conscience  when  thy 
last  hour  comes  as  he  hsd."  ^  His  Meditations, 
which  were  written  during  his  campaign  on  the 
Danube,  sometimes  touch  the  very  confines  of  the 
morality  illustrated  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
Surely  his  vision  of  an  ideal  goodness  was  revealed  to 
him  by  light  from  God.  His  personal  character  was 
not  unworthy  of  his  precepts.  He  was  laborious, 
courageous,  upright,  kindly,  and  magnanimous.  And 
yet  he  persecuted  the  Christians. 

To  what  extent  he  was  personally  responsible  for 
the  severities  inflicted  upon  them  has  been  disputed. 
During  his  reign  the  empire  suffered  grave  calami- 
ties, and  was  menaced  with  still  graver  dangers.  The 
public  mind  was  agitated  and  alarmed.  What  were 
the  causes  of  the  earthquakes,  pestilences,  famines, 
which  filled  the  Roman  world  with  distress?  By 
what  invisible  and  hostile  powers  had  the  barbarians 
on  the  frontiers  been  excited  to  rc\-olt  ?  Was  it 
possible  that  the  gods  were  angry  because  the  Chris- 
tians had  forsaken  their  temples,  and  were  speaking 
of  the  ancient  worship  with  fierce  contempt  ?  Popular 
terror  may  have  demanded  that  the  adherents  of  the 
new  superstition  should  be  sacrificed  as  a  propitiation 


'   The  T/ioiiii7ifs  of  tlte  Eni/icror  M.  Aiirctnia,  translated  by 
George  Long,  pp.  123,  124. 


IRENyEUS.  139 


to  the  offended  deities  ;  and  the  emperor  may  have  be- 
lieved that  it  would  be  imprudent,  perhaps  impossible, 
to  interfere  for  their  protection.  The  Christians 
had  suffered  under  Antoninus,  whom  he  venerated 
as  an  example  of  philosophic  virtue ;  and  as  the 
Christians  were  charged,  not  only  with  atheism,  but 
with  committing  in  secret  the  most  horrible  crimes, 
he  may  have  thought  that  they  deserved  to  die.  It 
is  probable  that  he  regarded  with  apprehension  the 
political  effects  of  this  strange  superstition  ;  common 
worship  was  one  of  the  strongest  securities  of  the 
unity  of  the  State  ;  there  was  disloyalty  to  the  empire 
in  the  refusal  to  take  part  in  the  public  religious 
ceremonies.  Whatever  may  be  the  explanation  of 
his  policy,  "  during  the  whole  course  of  his  reign,"  to 
quote  the  characteristic  words  of  Gibbon,  "  Marcus 
despised  the  Christians  as  a  philosopher,  and  punished 
them  as  a  sovereign." 

I. 

The  persecution  in  southern  Gaul  (a.d.  177) 
seems  to  have  begun  in  a  tumultuous  outbreak  of 
popular  passion.  The  general  hatred  with  which  the 
Christians  were  regarded  had,  for  some  unknown 
reasons,  become  so  fierce,  that  their  presence  was  not 
tolerated  in  the  baths,  the  markets,  or  the  public 
streets.  When  they  appeared  they  were  violently 
and  brutally  attacked  ;  they  were  stoned  and  robbed. 
To  bring  the  disorder  to  an  end  the  local  authorities 
intervened,  and  gave  orders  that  the  Christians  should 


I40  IRENyEUS. 


be  imprisoned,  and  that  on  the  arrival  of  the  governor 
of  the  province  they  should  be  put  on  their  trial,  A 
letter  from  "  the  servants  of  Christ  dwelling  in  Lyons 
and  V^ienne  in  Gaul  "  to  their  "brethren  in  Asia  and 
Phrygia"  tells  the  story  of  the  sufferings  which  the 
martyrs  endured,  first  from  the  fury  of  the  mob,  and 
afterwards  from  the  severities  of  the  law.  Nearly  all 
the  more  zealous  members  of  the  two  Churches  were 
seized.  To  subdue  their  courage  they  were  subjected 
to  intolerable  tortures.  They  were  cruelly  scourged. 
Some  were  compelled  to  sit  on  chairs  of  burning  iron. 
Many  died  from  the  horrible  treatment  inflicted  on 
them  in  prison.  There  were  some  whose  constancy 
gave  way  under  these  persistent  torments  ;  but  most 
of  them  showed  a  glorious  fidelity.  Those  who 
declared  their  Roman  citizenship  were  beheaded. 
The  rest  were  fiung  to  the  wild  beasts  at  the  public 
games. 

Among  the  martyrs  that  died  in  prison  was 
Pothinus,  bishop  of  Lyons.  He  was  more  than 
ninety  years  old,  and  was  very  infirm,  partly  from 
his  great  age,  partly  from  disease.  As  he  was  being 
dragged  away  from  the  public  tribunal,  the  crowd 
through  which  he  passed  struck  him  and  kicked 
him,  "showing  no  reverence  to  his  age";  those 
who  could  not  reach  him  flung  at  him  whatever  they 
had  in  their  hands,  to  avenge  the  injuries  which 
he  had  done  to  their  gods.  The  old  man's  strength 
was  exhausted,  and  in  two  days  he  died. 

Ireni\:us,  a  presbyter  in  the  Church  at  L)-on.s,  was 


IREN^EUS.  141 


elected  his  successor.  He  was  a  native  of  Asia 
Minor,  and  in  his  youth  had  Hved  in  Smyrna,  and 
had  known  Polycarp.  Between  the  Churches  of 
Asia  Minor  and  the  Churches  in  southern  Gaul 
the  relations  were  very  intimate.  It  was  from  Asia 
Minor,  in  all  probability,  that  Lyons  and  Vienne  had 
received  the  Christian  Gospel ;  and  the  Churches  in 
Asia  Minor  would  listen  to  the  story  of  the  courage 
and  fidelity  of  the  Christian  martyrs  in  these  two 
cities  with  the  same  kind  of  interest  and  gratitude 
and  entliusiasm  with  which  the  Congregational 
Churches  of  England,  thirty  or  forty  }-ears  ago, 
listened  to  the  story  of  the  courage  and  fidelity  of 
the  Christian  martyrs  of  Madagascar,  who  had  first 
heard  of  the  grace  and  glory  of  Christ  from  the 
lips  of  Congregational  missionaries. 

Even  as  a  presbyter  of  the  Church,  Irenxus  must 
have  been  a  man  of  some  distinction.  In  the  early 
days  of  the  persecution,  his  brethren,  who  were 
suffering  for  their  own  faith,  sent  him  to  Rome  to 
appeal  to  the  sympathy  of  Eleutherus,  At  that  time 
bishop  of  Rome,  on  behalf  of  the  Montanists,  who 
were  suffering  persecution  in  Asia  Minor  and  Phry- 
gia.  When  Irena^us  became  bishop,  after  the  mar- 
tyrdom of  Pothinus,  he  showed  great  vigour.  He 
was  zealous  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  ;  he 
was  a  resolute  assaihuit  of  heresy  ;  and  he  took  an 
active  part  in  the  more  important  ecclesiastical  affairs 
of  his  time. 


142  IREN/EUS. 


II. 

His  great  work  was  a  controversial  treatise  against 
Gnosticism,  which  was  written  in  the  early  years  of 
his  episcopate,  probably  between  A.D.  i8o  and  A.D. 
185.  It  is  usually  quoted  under  the  short  title, 
Against  Heresies.  He  uses  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  as  freely  as  any  modern  theologian,  and 
with  the  same  reverence  for  their  authority. 

One  of  his  testimonies  to  the  Four  Gospels  I  must 
give  at  length.     He  says  : 

"  So  firm  is  the  ground  on  which  these  Gospels  rest,  that  the 
very  heretics  themselves  bear  witness  to  them,  and,  starting 
from  these  [documents],  each  one  of  them  endeavours  to 
estabhsh  his  own  pccuhar  doctrine.  For  the  Ebionites,  who 
use  Matthew's  Gospel  only,  are  confuted  out  of  this  very  same, 
making  false  suppositions  with  regard  to  the  Lord.  But  IMar- 
cicn,  mutilating  that  according  to  Luke,  is  proved  to  be  a 
blasphemer  of  the  only  existing  God,  from  those  [passages] 
which  he  still  retains.  Those  again  who  separate  Jesus  from 
Cluist,  alleging  that  Christ  remained  impassible,  but  that  it  was 
Jesus  who  suffered,  preferring  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  if  they  read 
it  with  a  love  of  truth  may  have  their  errors  rectified.  Those, 
moreover,  who  follow  Valentinus,  making  copious  use  of  that 
according  to  John,  .  .  .  shall  be  proved  to  be  totally  in 
error  by  means  of  this  very  Gospel.  .  .  .  Since  then  our 
opponents  do  bear  testimony  to  us,  and  make  use  of  these 
[documents],  our  proof  derived  from  them  is  firm  and  true. 

"  It  is  not  possible  that  the  Gospels  can  be  either  more  or 
fewer  in  number  than  they  are.  For,  since  there  are  four  zones 
of  the  world  in  which  we  live,  and  four  principal  winds,  while 
the  Church  is  scattered  throughout  all  the  world,  and  the  '  pillar 
and  ground'  of  the  Church  is  Ihe  Gospel  and  the  spirit  of  life, 
it  is  fitting  that  she  should  have  four  pillars,  breathing  out  im- 
mortalitv  on  every  side,  and  vivifying  men  afresh.     From  which 


IRENAiUS.  143 

fact  it  is  evident  tliat  the  Word,  the  Artificer  of  all,  He  that 
sitteth  upon  the  cherubim,  and  contains  all  things,  He  who 
was  manifested  to  men,  has  given  us  the  Gospel  under  four 
aspects,  but  bound  together  by  one  Spirit.  As  also  David  says, 
when  entreating  His  manifestation,  '  Thou  that  sittest  between 
the  cherubim,  shine  forth.'  For  the  cherubim  too  were  four- 
faced,  and  their  faces  were  images  of  the  dispensation  of  the 
Son  of  God."  1 


The  testimony  to  the  Four  Gospels  in  this  pas- 
sage and  in  other  parts  of  the  writings  of  Irenaeus  is 
something  very  much  more  than  the  expression  of 
the  private  opinion  of  a  single  Christian  writer.  He 
is  expressing  what  he  assumes  to  be  the  general 
judgment  of  those  Christian  Churches  which  claimed 
to  inherit  the  apostolic  faith.  One  heretical  sect 
might  appeal  in  support  of  its  heresies  to  the  Gospel 
of  Matthew,  another  to  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  another 
to  the  Gospel  of  Luke,  another  to  the  Gospel  of 
John  ;  one  of  the  sects  might  mutilate  one  Gospel, 
and  another  another :  the  Churches  which  were 
faithful  to  the  apostolic  tradition  acknowledged 
the  authority  of  all  the  Four,  and  had  preserved  them 
unmutilated.  Irena.'us  was  bishop  of  Lyons  ;  he  had 
a  right  to  speak  for  the  Churches  of  southern  Gaul. 
He  had  recently  been  sent  on  an  important  mission 
to  Rome  ;  he  must  have  known  whether  or  not  the 
Roman  Church  regarded  all  the  Four  Gospels  with 
rc\-ercncc,  and  believed  that  the}'  were  written  by  the 


'  Iren^US  :     Against  Heresies   ("  Ante-Nicenc   Library"), 
vol.  i.,  pp.  292,  293. 


144  IREN.^US. 


men  whose  names  they  bear.  He  was  born  in  Asia 
Minor,  and  there  were  intimate  relations  between 
the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor  and  the  Churches  of 
Gaul  ;  he  had  a  right  to  speak  for  Asia  Minor.  His 
testimony  is  the  testimony  of  the  Churches  of  Asia 
Minor,  Rome,  and  southern  Gaul.  In  the  year  A.D. 
185,  all  these  Churches  held  that  our  Four  Gospels 
were  written  by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John. 
This,  indeed,  is  not  disputed. 

III. 

It  has  been  alleged  that  the  fanciful  arguments 
by  which  Irenaeus  attempts  to  prove  that  there  must 
be  Four  Gospels,  and  that  there  cannot  be  more  than 
Four,  deprive  his  testimony  of  all  value.  What 
weight,  it  has  been  asked,  can  be  attached  to  a  man's 
critical  judgment  who  contends  that,  because  there 
are  four  zones  of  the  world,  and  because  there  are 
four  principal  winds,  the  north,  the  south,  the  cast, 
and  the  west,  and  because  there  are  four  cherubim, 
there  must  be  four  authoritative  narratives  of  the 
life  of  our  Lord,  and  no  more  ?  But  the  question 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  critical  judgment  of 
Irenajus.  The  worth  of  his  testimony  does  not  rest 
upon  his  personal  competence  to  determine  whether 
the  h'our  Gospels  were  written  by  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke,  and  John,  but  upon  the  opportunities  which 
he  had  for  knowing  that  this  was  the  general  belief 
of  the  Church  in  his  time,  and  had  been  the  general 
belief  of  the  Church  as  lone:  as  he  could  remember. 


IRENJEUS.  145 


He  was  an  able  man  and  a  learned  man  ;  but, 
like  other  able  and  learned  men  of  those  days,  he 
found  parables  and  mysterious  symbols  where  wc 
find  none.  His  logic,  though  often  solid,  is  sometimes 
fanciful.  But  the  mystical  reasons  which  he  alleges 
for  there  being  Four  Gospels,  and  only  four,  instead 
of  lessening  the  force  of  his  testimony,  add  immensely 
to  its  strength.  Religious  veneration,  such  as  that 
with  which  he  regarded  these  books,  is  of  slow 
growth.  They  must  have  held  a  great  place  in  the 
Church  as  far  back  as  the  memory  of  living  men 
extended.  They  must  have  been  transmitted  to  him 
and  his  contemporaries  as  a  sacred  treasure  by  the 
preceding  generation. 

IV. 

Further:  Irena^us,  as  I  have  said,  came  from  Asia 
Minor,  and  it  was  in  Asia  Minor  that  the  Apostle 
John,  who  died  about  A.D.  100,  had  spent  his  last 
years.  In  A.D.  185  there  must  have  been  men  still 
living  in  Sm\-rna  and  in  Ephesus  who  had  known 
intimately  some  of  John's  personal  disciples  and 
friends.  Indeed,  Irena:us  himself,  in  his  early  \-outh, 
had  listened  to  the  teaching  of  Polycarp,  and  Poly- 
carp  had  had  "  intercourse  with  John "  and  with 
others  "  who  had  seen  the  Lord."  There  arc  several 
references  to  Polycarp  in  the  great  work  of  Irena:us 
on  the  Heresies,  but  the  most  interesting  and  in- 
structive reference  to  him  is  in  a  remonstrance  which 
he  addressed  to  Plorinus,  who  was  one  of  his  early 

L.  C.  10 


146  IREN.'EUS. 


friend.-^,  but  had  lapsed  into  heresy.^  After  saying 
that  the  present  opinions  of  Florinus  were  not  those 
which  had  been  handed  down  to  him  by  "  the  elders 
before  us,  who  also  were  disciples  of  the  apostles," 
Ireniuus  proceeds  : 

"For  I  saw  thee,  when  I  was  still  a  boy  in  Lower  Asia,  in 
company  with  Polycarp,  while  thou  wast  faring  prosperously 
in  the  royal  court,  and  endeavouring  to  stand  well  with  him. 
For  I  distinctly  i-emembcr  the  incidents  of  that  time  better  than 
events  of  recent  occurrence  ;  for  the  lessons  received  in  child- 
hood, growing  with  the  growth  of  the  soul,  become  identihed 
with  it ;  so  that  I  can  describe  the  very  place  in  which  the 
blessed  Polycarp  used  to  sit  when  he  discoursed,  and  his  goings 
out  and  his  comings  in,  and  his  manner  of  life,  and  his  personal 
appearance,  and  the  discourses  which  he  held  before  the  people, 
and  how  he  would  describe  his  intercourse  with  John  and  with 
the  rest  who  had  seen  the  Lord,  and  how  he  would  relate  their 
words.  And  whatsoever  he  had  heard  from  them  about  the 
Lord,  and  about  His  miracles,  and  about  His  teaching,  Polycarp, 
as  having  received  Iheni  from  eye-witnesses  of  th.e  life  of  the 
Word,  would  relate  altogether  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures. 
To  these  [discourses]  I  used  to  listen  at  the  time  with  attention, 
by  God's  niercy  which  was  bestowed  upon  me,  noting  them 
down,  not  on  paper,  but  in  my  heart  ;  and  by  the  grace  of  God 
I  constantly  ruminate  upon  ihcm  faithfully.'' 

We  can  imagine  Irena:us — presbyter,  bishop,  of 
Lyons— walking  slowly  and  in  deep  meditation  on 
the  banks  of  the  Rhone,  and  thinking  of  his  early 
years  when  he  listened  to  Pohxarp  in  Sm\-ma.     The 


*  The  passage  has  been  preserved  by  Eusebius,  Ecclesiastical 
History,  book  v.  20.  The  translation  given  in  the  text  is  by 
Dr.  Lightfoot,  and  appgtirs  in  his  Essays  on  the  ITork  Entitled 
'•  Sujier/iat/aat  Religion,"  pp.  96,  97. 


IREiV.EUS.  147 

face,  the  form,  the  voice  of  the  saintly  man  who  had 
died  a  martyr  for  Christ's  sake  came  back  to  him. 
He  could  recall  the  reverence  with  which  he  had 
heard  him  speak  of  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved, 
and  of  other  friends  of  the  Lord  whom  he  had 
known.  The  miracles  of  Christ  which  Polycarp  had 
heard  John  describe,  the  discourses  of  Christ  which 
Polycarp  had  heard  John  repeat,  Polycarp's  recol- 
lections of  John's  expositions  of  our  Lord's  words, 
Polycarp's  accounts  of  what  had  been  told  him  by 
other  men  who  had  been  the  friends  of  Christ  dur- 
ing His  earthly  history — all  these  were  to  Irenaeus  a 
most  precious  and  an  imperishable  possession.  Those 
were  his  student  days.^  It  was  then  that  he  was 
preparing  for  his  work  as  presbyter  and  bishop. 
What  he  had  heard  from  Polycarp  was  a  sacred 
trust ;  he  was  under  solemn  obligations  to  be  faithful 
to  it. 

Is  it  probable,  is  it  possible,  that  Ireiutus  would 
have  acknowledged  the  genuineness  and  authority  of 
a  Gospel  said  to  have  been  written  by  John  if  he  had 
never  heard  Polycarp  speak  of  it?  It  is  certain  that, 
when  he  heard  Poh'carp,  John  had  been  dead  for 
many  years  ;  if  at  that  time  Polycarp,  John's  disciple, 
had   known   nothing  of   any  Gospel   that  John  had 


'  Ircnceiis  s.iys  he  was  a  "boy"  when  he  heard  Polycarp  ;  he 
docs  not  mean  that  he  was  a  mere  child.  Mr.  Vcnablcs,  in  his 
article  on  Irena:us  in  the  Dictionary  of  Christian  Bioi^rapliy^ 
vol.  iii.,  p.  254,  cols.  I,  2,  argues  that  the  a,qc  of  a  "boy"— as 
Ircnicus  uses  the  word —began  about  the  eighteenth  year. 


148  lA'EiV.-EUS. 

written,  had  never  spoken  of  it,  I  cannot  believe  that 
Iren?EUs  would  ever  have  been  induced  to  receive  the 
Fourth  Gospel  as  having  been  written  by  Polycarp's 
master  and  friend." 

Irenrcus  had  received  traditions  concerning  our 
Lord  from  other  "  elders  "  who  had  known  the  ori- 
ginal apostles.  He  had  also  received  traditions  from 
some  who  had  been  the  friends  of  men  who  had 
known  the  original  apostles.  These  traditions  are 
indeed  not  always  trustworthy.  Some  of  the  "  elders  " 
whom  Irena^us  knew  or  from  whom  he  quotes  may 
have  misunderstood  what  they  heard  from  an  apostle 
or  from  a  friend  of  an  apostle  ;  or  may,  in  later  years, 
have  confused  what  they  heard  with  their  own  infe- 
rences from  it. 

Even  Polycarp's  recollection  of  the  precise  words 
which  he  had  heard  from  John  might  not  always 
have  been  perfectly  accurate  ;  he  might  have  mis- 
taken their  meaning  when  he  first  heard  them  ;  with 
the  lapse  of  years  phrases,  sentences,  lodged  in  his 
memory  might  have  been  moulded  into  new  forms 
by  the  ebb  and  flow  of  his  own  thoughts,  as  stones 
l}-ing  on  the  beach  are  rounded  and  polished  by  the 
ebb  and  flow  of  the  tide.  Traditions  of  what  the 
apostles  said,  even  when  they  are  reported  by  men 
wha  were  the  immediate  disciples  of  the  apostles, 
cannot  command  an  unqualified  con  fidcnce.  They 
require  collateral  support.     Still  less  can   they  com- 


IREN^US.  149 


m.ind  an  unqualified  confidence  when  they  arc  re- 
ported by  men  who  did  not  themselves  hear  the 
apostles,  although  the  tradition  may  have  come  to 
them  from  men  whose  intercourse  with  the  apostles 
had  been  intimate  and  had  extended  over  many 
years.  But,  if  the  question  at  issue  is  whether  a 
Gospel  bearing  the  name  of  John  contains  an  account 
of  our  Lord,  identical  in  substance  with  that  which 
John  was  accustomed  to  give  to  his  disciples,  then 
the  evidence  of  the  disciples  of  John  and  of  their  dis- 
ciples is  of  great  and  irresistible  strength.  If  they 
accept  the  Gospel,  if  they  offer  no  protest  against  its 
genuineness,  I,  for  my  part,  am  compelled  to  believe 
that  he  wrote  it. 

And  this  is  the  real  question  at  issue.  For  those 
who  contest  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  assert  that  it  contains  an  account  of  our  Lord 
wholly  different  from  that  which  John  would  have 
given  had  he  written  a  Gospel  at  all ;  that  its  concep- 
tion of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  as  the  eternal  Word  who 
had  become  flesh  to  reveal  the  Father  and  to  save 
the  world,  is  rooted  in  philosophical  speculations  on 
the  nature  and  being  of  God,  wholly  alien  from  the 
thought  of  the  fisherman  of  Galilee,  who  was  an 
unlearned  man  ;  that  its  spiritual  freedom  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  religious  position  of  John,  who  was 
an  apostle  of  the  circumcision,  and  who,  it  is  main- 
tained, regarded  Paul's  revolt  against  Judaism  with 
stern  hostility  ;  that  what  are  described  as  the  simple 
ethical  discourses  contained  in  the  first  three  Gospels 


I  REN  ALUS. 


represent  tlic  real  character  of  our  Lord's  teaching, 
and  that  therefore  none  of  Mis  original  apostles  could 
have  attributed  to  Him  the  mystical  and  dogmatic 
discourses  contained  in  the  fourth.  In  other  words, 
it  is  contended,  not  only  that  John  did  not  write  the 
Gospel  which  bears  his  name,  but  that  he  could  not 
have  written  it,  since  it  contains  a  theory  of  our 
Lord's  Person  and  an  account  of  our  Lord's  teaching 
such  as  John  himself  could  never  have  given  to  his 
disciples. 

The  contention  is  an  impossible  one.  If  the  repre- 
sentation of  our  Lord  and  of  our  Lord's  teaching  in 
the  Fourth  Gospel  had  been  wholly  different  from 
that  which  John  had  given  during  his  lifetime,  neither 
John's  friendij  nor  the  disciples  of  John's  friends 
would  have  allowed  it  to  ha\-e  been  accepted  as 
genuine. 

Suppose  that  Dr.  Fusey  had  never  published  any 
books,  or  tracts,  or  sermons  during  his  life,  but  had 
taught  his  characteristic  doctrines  concerning  the 
Church,  the  Priesthood,  and  the  Sacraments  to  suc- 
cessive generations  of  Oxford  students.  He  died  in 
18S2.  Suppose  that  earl)'  in  the  next  centur}', 
twenty  years  after  his  death,  or  even  thirty  or  forty, 
a  treatise  were  to  appear,  bearing  his  name,  which 
assailed  with  elaborate  argument  the  whole  theory 
of  P'piscopacy,  and  maintained  that  every  separate 
congregation  of  devout  men  and  women  is,  according 
to  the  idea  of  Christ,  a  true  Church,  under  Christ's 
immediate  government,  and  with  powers  derived  from 


JREN.EUS. 


Christ's  presence  to  appoint  its  own  ministers  and  to 
exercise  discipline  ;  suppose  that  this  treatise,  attri- 
buted to  Dr.  Pusc)',  contained  a  vigorous  attack  on 
the  doctrine  of  Baptismal  Regeneration  and  the  Real 
Presence  in  the  Eucharist,  and  defended  the  Zuinglian 
theory  of  the  Sacraments  :  is  it  credible  that,  while 
men  were  still  li\ing  who  had  been  Dr.  Pusey's 
students  at  Oxford,  this  treatise  would  be  received 
as  genuine?  is  it  credible  that  it  would  be  received 
as  genuine  while  men  were  still  living  who  had 
derived  their  ecclesiastical  and  sacramental  beliefs 
from  Dr.  Pusey's  students  ?  Would  there  be  no  pro- 
test, no  controversy? 

But  the  theory  which  denies  that  John  could  have 
written  the  Fourth  Gospel  requires  us  to  believe 
something  quite  as  incredible.  For,  according  to  this 
theory,  the  doctrinal  teaching  of  the  P^ourth  Gospel  is 
as  irreconcilable  with  what  it  is  alleged  the  doctrinal 
teaching  of  John  must  have  been,  as  the  ecclesiastical 
and  sacramental  teaching  of  the  imaginary  treatise, 
published  after  Dr.  Pusey's  death,  with  Dr.  Pusey's 
ecclesiastical  and  sacramental  teaching  during  his 
life.  And  yet  there  is  no  trace  of  any  protest  against 
the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  on 
the  part  of  the  men  who  had  known  John  for  many 
years  and  who  had  loved  and  re\'crcnced  him  ;  and 
it  is  certain  that  scholars  and  bishops  who  were  the 
friends  of  John's  tricnds,  and  had  received  from  them 
the  tradition  of  his  sanctity  and  of  his  teaching, 
believed  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  contains  an  authentic 


152  J  REN  ALUS. 

account  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  and  that  John  wrote 
it.  For  me  this,  at  least,  is  absolutely  certain,  that 
the  representation  of  our  Lord  and  of  His  teaching 
given  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  identical  in  substance 
with  that  which  the  Churches  of  Asia  had  heard  from 
John's  own  lips. 


LECTURE  IX. 

TAT  I  AN. 

I. 

IN  his  Address  to  tJic  Greeks,  Tatian  tells  us  that  he 
was  born  in  Assyria ;  that  in  his  j-outh  and  early 
manhood  he  was  instructed  in  the  laws,  the  literature, 
and  the  religious  beliefs  of  the  Greeks  ;  that  he 
travelled  in  many  lands,  and  became  familiar  with 
the  customs  and  philosophies  of  many  races  of  men  ; 
that  he  carefully  considered  their  religious  rites,  and 
was  initiated  into  their  mysteries.  According  to 
Eusebius,  he  was  a  sophist — a  professional  rhetorician 
— and  lectured  with  distinction  on  various  branches 
of  Greek  learning. 

At  last,  to  use  his  own  phrase,  he  withdrew  into 
himself,  that,  if  possible,  he  might  discover  the  truth. 
While  he  was  earnestly  engaged  in  this  inquiry,  he 
happened  to  meet  with  certain  "  barbaric  writings," 
as  he  calls  them,  some  of  which  were  more  ancient 
than  Homer,  and  than  the  earliest  of  the  writers  who 
were  honoured  by  the  Greeks,  and  more  ancient 
than  even  their  legendary  heroes.  The  sacred 
books  of  the  Jews  attracted   him  by  the  simplicity  of 

'53 


154  TATIAN. 

their  .st}-lc,  by  the  naturahiess  and  sincerity  of  their 
writers,  by  the  knowledge  of  future  events  which  was 
shown  in  their  prophecies,  by  their  admirable  moral 
precepts,  and  by  their  teaching  concerning  the  unity 
and  supremacy  of  God.^  In  Christ  he  found  the  ful- 
filment of  Jewish  hope,  and  so  he  became  a  Christian. 

About  the  middle  of  the  second  century  he  was  in 
Rome.  At  this  time  he  was  intimately  associated 
with  Justin  Martyr,  and  was  a  conspicuous  defender 
of  the  Christian  Faith.  He  tells  us  that  Crescens,  a 
philosopher,  was  the  bitter  enemy  of  both  of  them, 
and  plotted  their  death.  During  the  life  of  Justin  his 
opinions  were  orthodox,  but  after  the  death  of  his 
friend  his  name  was  associated  with  some  serious 
heresies.  He  came  to  hold  severe  views  concerning 
the  evil  of  the  "  flesh,"  and  denounced  marriage  as  a 
crime  against  the  higher  life  of  the  soul.  He  was 
also  charged  with  adopting  some  of  the  speculations 
of  Valentinus  the  Gnostic.  When  he  left  Rome,  he 
appears  to  have  travelled  eastward,  and  his  last  years 
were  probably  spent  among  his  countrymen  on  the 
banks  of  the  Euphrates. 

Although  he  regarded  Justin  with  affectionate  ad- 
miration,'-' the  two  men  were  very  unlike.  Justin  could 
never  wholly  forget  the  charm  of  his  old  philosophical 
studies,  and  speaks  with  sympathy  of  those  who  by 


'  Address  to  the  Creeks,  cap.  29,  31,  41. 

*  He  speaks  \\\  \\\%  Address  zvi^.  18,  of  "  llie  most  admirable 
Justin." 


T ATI  AN.  155 

adventurous  paths  of  speculation  were  endeavouring 
to  find  their  way  to  the  secret  of  the  universe,  and  to 
the  Hfe  of  God.  Tatian,  who  was  probably  a  more 
learned  man  than  Justin,  assails  every  form  of  human 
philosophy  with  fierce  contempt.  P3'thagoras,  Plato 
and  Aristotle,  Heraclitus  and  Diogenes — he  scorns 
and  ridicules  them  all.  He  exults  in  the  traditions 
— some  of  them  quite  untrustworthy — of  their  infir- 
mities and  vices,  and  he  mocks  at  their  claims  to 
wisdom.  A  very  few  years  ago  it  would  have  been 
necessary  to  say  that  of  all  his  numerous  writings 
only  his  Address  to  the  Greeks  remains  ;  but,  to  the 
astonishment  and  delight  of  scholars,  the  most  im- 
portant and  valuable  of  his  lost  books  has  been 
recently  recovered.  The  story  of  the  recovery  is  so 
interesting  that  I  will  venture  to  tell  it. 

II. 

In  several  ancient  authors  there  are  references  to 
what  is  described  as  Tatian's  Diatessaron.  Eusebius 
sa}'s  that 

"  Tatian  composed  a  sort  of  connexion  and  compilation,  I 
know  not  liow,  ofthe  (lospels,  and  called  it  TJie  Diatessaron. 
This  work  is  current  in  some  quarters  even  to  the  present 
day."  » 

Kpiphanius  (about  A.D.  315  to  A.D.  403)  informs  us 
that 

'  Ecctcsiastical  History,  'w.  29.  Tl-c  translation  given  in  the 
text  is  Ur.  Li'jlufoot's. 


156  TATIAX. 

"  The  Diatcssaron  Gospel  is  said  to  have  been  composed  by 
him  [Tatian].  It  is  called  by  some  the  Gospel  according  to 
the  Hebrews." ' 

In  453,  Theodorct,  Bishop  of  Cyirhus,  near  the 
Euphrates,  writes  : 

"  He  [Tatian]  composed  the  Gospel  which  is  called  Diates- 
saron,  cutting  out  the  genealogies  and  such  other  passages  as 
show  the  Lord  to  have  been  born  of  the  seed  of  David  according 
to  the  flesh.  This  work  was  in  use,  not  only  among  persons 
belonging  to  his  sect,  but  also  among  those  who  follow  the 
apostolic  doctrine,  as  they  did  not  perceive  the  mischief  of  the 
composition,  but  used  the  book  in  all  simplicity  on  account  of 
its  brevity.  A  fid  I  myself  found  7nore  ilian  hvo  hujidtrd  such 
copies  lie  Id  zjt  respect  in  the  CJnirchcs  of  otir  parts.  All  these 
I  collected  and  put  a^cay,  and  I  replaced  them  by  the  Gospels  of 
the  Four  E^'anj^elists."  - 

This  testimony  is  important.  Theodorct  knew  the 
book  and  had  carefully  examined  it  ;  his  words 
clearly  imply  that  it  was  a  compilation  of  the  Four 
Gospels  with  certain  passages  cancelled  which  were 
inconsistent  with  Tatian's  heresies  concerning  the 
necessary  evil  of  the  "  flesh." 

There  is  also  a  reference  to  the  Diatcssaron  in  the 
Doclrine  of  Addai^  a  kind  of  romance  written  in 
S}'riac,  and  professing  to  give  an  account  of  the  intro- 

'  That  the  Diatcssaron  was  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews  was  either  a  mistake  of  Epiphanius  himself,  or  else  of 
the  persons  whose  opinions  he  is  reporting.  It  is  clear  that 
Epiphanius  had  never  ?,CQ.m\\Q  Diatessanm,  For  an  explana- 
tion of  the  origin  of  the  error,  see  HEMPHILL  :  The  Diatessaron 
of  Tatian,  p.  xv. 

H I :  M  p 1 1 1 LL  ;   The  Diatcssaron  of  Tatian,  p.  xvi. 


T ATI  AN.  157 

duction  of  Christianity  into  Edessa.^  It  contains  the 
legend  of  Abgarus,  the  king  of  Edessa,  who,  when 
suffering  from  an  incurable  disease,  is  said  to  have 
heard  of  the  miracles  of  our  Lord,  and  to  have  sent  a 
message  to  Him  appealing  to  His  pity,  and  imploring 
him  to  come  to  Edessa.  The  romance  gives  the 
following  account  of  the  worship  of  the  Church  which 
was  founded  in  Edessa  after  our  Lord's  resurrection. 

"  They  ministei^ed  in  the  church  which  Addasus  had  built,  at 
the  order  and  command  of  king  Abgar,  and  they  were  furnished 
from  what  belonged  to  the  king  and  to  his  nobles  with  some 
things  for  the  house  of  God,  and  others  for  the  supply  of  the 
poor.  But  a  large  multitude  of  people  assembled  day  by  day, 
and  came  to  the  prayers  of  the  service,  and  to  the  reading  of  the 
Old  Testament  and  the  New  of  the  Dia!cssaro/i."' 

The  story  told  in  the  Doctrine  of  Addai  is  wholly 
untrustworthy,  but  it  shows  that  the  Diatessaj'on  must 
have  been  in  common  use  in  the  Syrian  Church  when 
the  book  was  written. 

There  is  another  testimony  from  a  Syrian  bishop, 
Bar-Salibi,  who  lived  at  the  end  of  the  twelfth 
century.     He  says   that    the    Diatcssaron    of  Tatian 

'  Lipsius  thinks  that  it  belongs  to  the  end  of  the  third  century 
or  the  beginning  of  the  fourth,  but  that  "its  groundwork  must 
be  much   earlier." — Dictionary  of  Christian  Biogiapli)\  vol.  i. 

P-3I- 

^  IIKiMPHILL,  p.  xvii.  This  romance  was  first  published  in 
Dr.  Cureton's  Ancient  Syriac Documents  (1S64).  Curcton's  MS. 
read  Ditornon,  to  which  word  no  meaning  could  be  attached. 
A  MS.  since  discovered  at  St.  Petersburg  contains  the  reading 
Diatessaron. 


158  TAT  I  AN. 

began  with  the  opening  verse  of  John's  Gospel.  He 
also  sa}-s  that  Ephraem  the  Syrian  (about  A.i).  308  to 
A.D.  373),  theologian,  poet,  orator,  saint,  wrote  a  com- 
mentary on  it. 

"  Tatian,  the  disciple  of  Justin,  the  philosopher  and  martyr, 
selected  and  patched  toc;ether  from  the  Four  Gospels  and  con- 
structed a  Gospel  which  he  called  Diaiessaro7i ;  that  is,  Miscel- 
lanies. On  this  work  Mar  Ephraem  wrote  an  exposition,  and 
its  commencement  was,  '  In  the  deginnii!i^7i'as  tJic  Word.'"' ' 

This  was  about  all  that  was  known  in  England  of 
the  Diatcssaron  when  Dr.  Lightfoot  wrote  the  article 
on  Tatian  which  appeared  in  the  Contemporary  Rcviciv 
for  ]Ma}',  1S77  ;  and  the  evidence  did  not  satisfy  those 
who  were  unwilling  to  believe  that  as  early  as  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  or  a  little  later,  our  Four 
Gospels  had  not  only  been  written,  but  had  secured 
so  uncontested  a  supremacy  that  even  a  heretic  like 
Tatian  recognised  their  authorit}',  and  used  them  as 
the  basis  of  his  narrative  of  our  Lord's  earthly  history. 
Of  the  witnesses  whose  testimony  has  been  quoted, 
it  is  at  least  doubtful  whether  Eusebius  had  seen  the 
book.  It  is  certain,  I  think,  that  Epiphanius  had  not 
seen  it.  The  great  writers  of  the  West  knew  nothing 
of  it.  Victor  of  Capua,  indeed,  ^\■ho  flourished  about 
the  middle  of  the  sixth  century,  had  met  with  a 
Harmony  of  tJic  Gospels,  and  supposed  that  it  was  the 
one  which,  according  to  Eusebius,  had  been  composed 
by  Tatian  ;  but  Victor  calls  it  the  Diapente,  not  the 
Diatessaroii,  and  it  began  with  the  first  verse  of  Luke 

'  IIi:Mriin.i,,  p.  xi.\. 


TATIAN.  159 

instead  of  the  first  verse  of  John.  It  was  only  from 
the  three  Syrian  witnesses — Theodoret,  and  the  writer 
of  the  Doctrine  of  Addai,  and  Bar-Sahbi — that  any 
clear  and  satisfactory  evidence  could  be  derived.  But 
Dr.  Lightfoot  maintained  with  great  force  that  the 
traditional  view  of  the  Church  was  sound  ;  that  Tatian 
had  compiled  a  story  of  our  Lord's  life  from  the  Four 
Gospels,  and  had  called  it  the  Diatcssaron. 

If  Ephraem's  Commentary  on  the  Diatessaron  had 
been  preserved,  the  controversy  might  have  been 
closed,  for  the  Commentary  would  certainly  show  the 
general  structure  and  outlines  of  the  book,  and  would 
probably  contain  many  quotations  from  it.  Unfor- 
tunately, early  in  the  last  century,  a  ship,  laden  with 
ancient  manuscripts  for  Pope  Clement  XI.,  sank  in 
the  Nile,  and  many  of  Ephraem's  writings  were  lost ; 
among  them,  perhaps,  his  Lectures  on  the  Diatcssaron. 
To  recover  the  lost  book  from  the  bed  of  the  Nile 
was  impossible  ;  it  perished  long  ago  ;  but  might  not 
some  other  cop}-  be  still  in  existence? 

III. 

Strangely  enough,  at  the  very  time  that  Dr. 
Lightfoot  was  writing  his  article,  and  building  up  liis 
laborious  argument,  he  had  Ephraem's  Lectures  on 
his  own  bookshelves,  and  they  had  been  there  for 
several    ycars.^      An    Armenian    translation   of  theni 

'  Essays  on  tJie  Work  entitled.,  '^  Supirnatiiral  Religion^'' 
p.  2S7,  note. 


l6o  TATIAN. 

had  been  published  in  1836  by  the  Mechitarist  monks, 
who  arc  settled  on  the  island  of  San  Lazzaro,  in  the 
lagune  between  the  Lido  and  Venice.  These  monks 
have  had  a  remarkable  history,  and  have  done  a 
remarkable  work.  Mcchitar,  the  founder  of  the  order, 
was  an  Armenian,  and  was  born  in  1676,  at  Siwar, 
the  ancient  Scbastia,  a  town  near  the  source  of  the 
Halys,  on  the  borders  of  Pontus  and  Cappadocia. 
In  1699  he  was  ordained  priest,  and  came  to  be  pos- 
sessed with  a  passion  for  promoting  both  the  intel- 
lectual and  spiritual  welfare  of  his  countrymen.  He 
went  to  Constantinople,  and  formed  an  association  to 
carry  out  his  design.  Difficulties  arose  which  led 
him  to  transfer  his  new  society  to  Modon  in  the 
Morea,  which  at  that  time  belonged  to  Venice.  Here 
he  and  his  companions  worked  for  fourteen  years, 
until,  in  17 15,  the  Morea  was  recovered  by  the  Turks, 
and  Mechitar's  convent  was  broken  up.  He  then 
received  from  the  government  of  Venice  the  island 
of  San  Lazzaro,  and  from  that  time  the  Venetian 
convent  has  been  the  mother  house  of  the  order, 
and  the  centre  of  Armenian  culture.  Other  congre- 
gations have  been  founded  in  Vienna,  at  Trieste,  and 
at  several  places  in  Hungary. 

The  Allgoneine  Zeitiui^  {Dec.  17th,  1850),  beai's  a 
strong  testimony  to  the  great  services  which  the 
Mechitarists  have  rendered  to  their  fellow  country- 
men.     It  says  : 

"  Wlicn  one  takes  a  nearer  view  of  their  laljours  at  Vienna 
and  \'enice,  one  is  amazed  at  the  powerful  inllucnce  which  the 


TATIAX.  l6i 

literary  activity  of  these  learned  monks  exerts  on  the  Armenian 
nation  scattered  throughout  the  East.  The  reviews,  the  books, 
the  numerous  translations  of  works  on  history,  geography,  phi- 
lolog}',  natural  science,  and  voyages  and  travels,  which  are 
printed  in  the  Mechitarist  presses  of  Vienna  and  Venice,  are 
carried  far  beyond  Persia  to  the  banks  of  the  Indus  and  the 
Ganges,  and  have  everywhere  called  forth  among  the  Arme- 
nians the  desire  of  knowledge  and  a  taste  for  reading,  and  set 
on  foot  a  literary  movement,  which  was  before  entirely  dormant 
in  a  people,  till  lately,  essentially  and  exclusively  commercial."  ^ 

Among  the  treasures  of  their  library  the  monks 
possess  "two  1 2th  century  MSS.  of  an  Armenian 
translation,  made  apparently  in  the  fifth  century  from 
the  Syriac,  of  Ephraem's  Commentary  on  a  Gospel 
Harmony."  2  In  1836  they  published  an  Armenian 
edition  of  Ephraem's  works  in  four  volumes  octavo ; 
and  the  commentary  is  contained  in  the  second 
volume. 

"I  had  for  some  years,"  says  Dr.  Lightfoot,  writing  in  1SS9, 
"possessed  a  copy  of  this  work,  .  .  .  and  the  thought  had 
more  than  once  crossed  my  mind  that  possibly  it  might  throw 
light  on  Ephraem's  mode  of  dealing  with  the  Gospels,  as  I 
knew  that  it  contained  notes  on  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  or  some 
portion  of  them.  I  did  not,  however,  then  possess  sufficient 
knowledge  of  Armenian  to  sift  its  contents,  but  I  hoped  to 
investigate  the  matter  when  I  had  mastered  enough  of  the 
language." ' 


'  The  account  of  tlic  Mechitarists  in  the  text  is  summarized 
from  an  article  in  Addis  and  Arnold's  Catholic  Dictionary  :  and 
the  passage  from  the  Alli:;eiiieine  Zeitimg  is  taken  from  that 
article. 

*  HEMrilll.L,  p.  xxi. 

'  Essays,  etc.,  p.  2S7. 

L.  C.  1 1 


iC2  TATIAN. 

But  even  without  a  knowledge  ot  Armenian, 
Dn.  Lightfoot  might  have  known  the  contents  of 
Ephraem's  Lectures  before  he  published  his  article  in 
May,  1877.  For  in  1876  a  Latin  translation  had 
been  published  in  Venice.  As  early  as  1841,  one  of 
the  monks.  Father  Aucha,  had  translated  the  Lectures 
into  Latin,  but  the  translation  had  remained  in  MS. 
in  the  Library  of  San  Lazzaro.  At  last  it  somehow 
came  to  the  knowledge  of  Dr.  George  Mocsinger, 
professor  of  biblical  studies  at  Salzburg,  and  it  was 
placed  in  his  hands,  with  one  of  the  MSS.  from  which 
the  Armenian  text  had  been  printed.  He  revised 
the  translation,  and  published  it,  as  I  have  said,  in 
1876.  Dr.  Wace,  who  wrote  a  series  of  admirable 
articles  on  the  Diatessaron,  in  the  Expositor  for  1881 
and  1882,  justly  remarks  that  "considering  the  im- 
mense importance  of  Ephraem's  work,  it  is  a  most 
curious  point  that  it  should  have  been  before  the 
world  for  nearly  five  years  in  a  Latin  translation,  and 
should  have  remained  practical!}'  unnoticed  b}-  any 
of  the  laborious  scholars  of  German}'."  ^  He  adds  : 
"  Such  an  incident  might  well  lead  us  to  think  that 
our  materials  for  criticism  are  beginning  to  overpower 
us,  and  that  some  of  our  best  treasures  may  be  hidden 


'  Tic  Exposihn-^  vol.  ii.,  second  series,  p.  3.  Dr.  Wacc  quotes 
from  a  notice  by  Dr.  Adolf  Harnack,  which  had  recently 
ajipenred  in  Briegcr's  Zeiischrift  fiir  Kirchc)i^:^csc1iicliie,  the 
following  sentence:  "Without  doubt  this  publication  contains 
the  most  important  acquisition  which  our  history  of  pre-catholic 
Christianity  has  received  of  late  years." 


TA  TIAN.  163 

from  us  like  needles  in  a  hay-stack."  It  is  also 
curious  that  the  importance  of  this  discovery  was  at 
last  brought  home  to  the  scholars  of  Germany  and 
England  by  an  American  theologian,  Dr.  Ezra  Abbot, 
who  called  attention  to  it  in  his  book  on  the  Author- 
ship of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  published  in  1880. 

The  Lectures  —  or,  as  Dr.  Wacc  prefers  to  call 
them,  the  Seholia  of  Ephraem — demonstrated  that 
the  Diatessaron  of  Tatian,  published  soon  after  the 
middle  of  the  second  century,  was  a  continuous  narra- 
tive of  our  Lord's  life,  consisting  of  "  a  close  welding 
together  of  the  Four  canonical  Gospels."  How  much 
of  the  contents  of  the  Gospels  Tatian  omitted  could 
not  be  confidently  inferred  from  Ephraem's  Lectures, 
for  the  Lectures  are  not  a  continuous  commentar}*  ; 
Ijut  it  was  certain  that  Tatian  used  all  the  Four,  and 
no  other.^ 

IV. 

But  the  romantic  story  of  the  Diatessaron  is  not 
yet  finished.  The  discovery  of  Ephraem's  Lectures 
has  been  followed  by  the  discovery  of  the  Diatessaron 
itself 

A  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago  Stephen  Evodius 
Assemani,  a  Syrian  Maronitc,  and  a  member  of  a 
family  of  famous  Orientalists,  assisted  his  uncle 
Joseph  Aloysius  in  his  work  in  the  Vatican  Library  ; 
and  he  published,  among  other  learned  books,  an 
account  of  the  Oriental  manuscripts  contained  in  the 


'  Expositor,  vol.  ii.,  second  series,  pp.  10,  11. 


1 64  7  ATI  AN. 

Library.  In  tliis  there  is  a  brief  notice  of  an  Arabic 
MS.  professing  to  be  a  translation  of  the  Diatessaron 
of  Tatian.  Brief  accounts  of  it  were  also  given  by 
Akerblad  and  the  younger  Rosenmiiller.  Akerblad, 
a  Swedish  scholar,  who  was  famous  for  his  Runic, 
Coptic,  Phoenician,  and  ancient  Egyptian  learning, 
died  about  seventy  years  ago.  The  younger  Rosen- 
miiller, Professor  of  Oriental  Literature  at  Leipsic, 
died  some  years  later.  But  the  accounts  which  these 
three  eminent  scholars  had  given  of  the  MS.  were 
meagre  and  unsatisfactory. 

The  discussions  which  were  occasioned  by  the 
publication  of  Ephraem's  Lectures  recalled  attention 
to  these  notices  of  the  MS.,  and  Ciasca,  one  of  the 
scribes  of  the  Vatican,  promised  in  1883  to  give  a 
fuller  and  more  accurate  description  of  it,  and,  if  he 
had  the  leisure,  to  publish  it  in  full.  Circumstances 
delayed  the  fulfilment  of  both  promises.  But  in  the 
year  1886  an  eminent  dignitary  aro.ong  the  Catholic 
Copts  was  visiung  Rome,  and  Ciasca  showed  him 
the  Tatian  MS.  He  said  that  a  similar  one  was 
in  the  possession  of  a  member  of  his  communion  in 
Egypt.  In  the  course  of  the  summer  this  second 
MS.,  which  is  described  as  beautifully  written  and 
illuminated  in  gold  and  colours,  was  .sent  to  Rome  ; 
and  in  1888  it  was  published.^ 

It  contains  notes  at  the  beginning  and    the  end  in 


*   7\jtiatii  Evangdiorum  IlaanonuT  Alalia:     Rom?c,  S.C. 
Dc  Prop.  Fid.,  1888. 


TATIAN.  165 

which  it  is  described  as  an  Arabic  translation  of 
Tatian's  Diatessaron  made  from  the  Syriac  ;  it  gives 
the  name  of  the  translator  and  also  the  name  of  the 
writer  of  the  Syriac  MS.  from  which  the  translation 
was  made.  The  translator  lived  in  the  early  part  of 
the  eleventh  century  ;  the  writer  of  the  Syriac  MS. 
at  the  end  of  the  ninth  century.  The  Egyptian  MS. 
supplies  passages  which  are  wanting  in  the  imperfect 
MS.  in  the  Vatican,  and  it  is  free  from  the  inter- 
polations which  are  recognisable  in  that  MS. 

The  date  of  this  translation  shows  that  six  cen- 
turies after  Theodoret  had  collected  two  hundred 
copies  of  the  Diatessaron  from  the  Churches  of  his 
diocese,  and  replaced  them  with  copies  of  the  Four 
Gospels,  there  were  Ass}-rian  Christians  who  still 
clung  to  the  book  from  which  their  fathers  in  the 
second  century  had  learnt  the  story  of  Christ.  But 
their  country  was  under  the  Saracen  yoke  ;  they  had 
forgotten  the  mother  tongue  of  their  race  ;  they  were 
speaking  the  language  of  their  conquerors  ;  and  so 
the  Diatessaron  was  translated  into  Arabic. 

In  its  contents  and  in  the  order  in  which  the  facts 
of  our  Lord's  life  are  narrated  the  Arabic  Diatessaron 
is  practically  identical  with  the  Syriac  Diatessaron 
which  was  used  by  Ephraem.  "  Except  in  four  in- 
stances, the  order  in  which  passages  of  the  Gospels  are 
cited  by  Ephraem  is  the  order  in  which  they  occur 
in  the  Arabic  Harmony."  ^     It  begins  with  the  first 


'  Hemphill,  pp.  xxviii,  xxix. 


i66  r ATI  AN. 

five  verses  of  the  Gospel  of  John  ;  then  follows  the 
account  of  the  birth  of  John  the  Baptist  contained 
in  the  first  chapter  of  Luke  ;  then  the  appearance 
of  the  angel  to  Joseph  as  told  by  Matthew  ;  then  the 
story  of  our  Lord's  birth,  the  appearance  of  the  angels 
to  the  shepherds,  the  prophecy  of  Simeon  and  of 
Anna  as  given  by  Luke  ;  then  the  visit  of  the  Magi, 
the  flight  into  Eg}'pt,  the  slaughter  of  the  children 
of  Bethlehem,  and  the  return  of  Joseph  and  Mary 
to  Nazareth,  as  told  by  Matthew.  From  this  point 
Ephracm  passes  to  the  great  words  in  the  first  chapter 
of  John  :  "  And  the  Word  became  flesh,  and  dwelt  in 
us.  Through  Moses  is  the  law,  but  its  truth  through 
Jesus  our  Lord.  Grace  and  truth  cam.e  through 
Jesus.  The  Jews  sent  to  John  and  say  to  him,  Who 
art  thou  ?  He  confessed,  saying,  I  am  not  the  Christ. 
They  say  to  him.  Art  thou  Elias  ?  He  says.  No."  ^ 
But  the  Diatessaron,  after  the  slaughter  of  the  child- 
ren and  after  the  return  to  Nazareth,  gives  Luke's 
account  of  our  Lord's  visit  to  Jerusalem  when  He 
was  twelve  years  of  age  ;  this  is  followed  by  a  brief 
statement  of  the  beginning  of  the  ministry  of  John 
the  Baptist ;  and  then  follows  John  i.  7-28,  which 
contains  the  passage  just  quoted  from  Ephraem.     In 


'  I  have  given  this  quotation  as  it  appears  in  Hemphill.  It 
nuibt  be  remembered  that  Ephraem  wrote  in  Syriac  ;  that 
we  have  his  Lectures  in  an  Armenian  transhition  ;  that  the 
.'\rmenian  transhuion  has  been  translated  into  Latin,  and  that 
it  is  from  this  Latin  translation  of  an  Armenian  translation  that 
the  passage  has  been  translated  into  En<^Ush. 


TAT/ AX.  167 

Ephracm,  singularly  enough,  the  comments  on  our 
Lord's  visit  to  Jerusalem  in  His  boyhood  occur  after 
the  comments  on  this  testimony  of  the  Baptist. 
This  is  one  of  the  four  cases  in  which  Ephraem's 
order  differs  from  the  order  of  the  Arabic  Diatcssaroii. 
Until  the  story  reaches  the  selection  of  the  Twelve 
Apostles  Tatian  shows  considerable  freedom  in  his 
arrangement  of  the  incidents  ;  but  after  this,  and  be- 
ginning with  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  he  practically 
follows  Matthew's  order,  until  he  comes  to  the  Last 
Supper.  Passages  from  Mark,  Luke,  and  John  are 
introduced  at  successive  stages  of  the  narrative.  On 
what  principle  he  determined  their  place  it  is  difficult 
to  discover.  Why,  for  instance,  should  he  have  given 
the  account  of  the  visit  of  Nicodemus  to  our  Lord 
(John  iii.  1-2 1)  after  the  story  of  the  barren  fig  tree, 
and  far  on  towards  the  close  of  our  Lord's  ministry? 
In  this  singular  order  Ephraem  agrees  with  the 
Arabic  text. 

But  while  it  is  apparent  that  the  contents  and 
arrangement  of  the  Arabic  Diatcssarou  are  practically 
identical  with  the  contents  and  arrangement  of  the 
S>'riac  Dlatessaroii  used  by  Ephraem,  the  readings  of 
the  translation  show  that  the  text  had  been  revised. 
Ephraem's  quotations  represent  a  more  ancient  text 
than  that  represented  by  the  Arabic  translation. 

V. 

.\nd  now,  ha\- 1 ng  told  the  story  of  the  discovery 
of  these  two  ancient   books  —  the    Dicntcssaron   and 


i6S  TATIAN. 

the  Lectures  upon  it — I  have  to  show  their  vakie  in 
relation  to  the  question  of  the  early  origin  and  the 
historical  trustworthiness  of  our  Four  Gospels. 

Tatian  was  a  man  of  intellectual  vigour,  and  a 
scholar.  There  was  fierceness  in  him,  and  obstinacy, 
and  intolerance  ;  but  his  Address  to  the  Greeks  gives 
one  the  impression  that  he  had  courage  and  incor- 
ruptible honesty.  He  was  a  friend  of  Justin.  He 
had  travelled  far,  and  had  seen  the  Christians  of 
many  lands.  And,  what  for  my  immediate  purpose 
is  as  important  as  any  of  the  facts  which  I  have  just 
recited,  he  was  a  heretic. 

The  date  at  which  he  left  Rome  is  uncertain.  It 
may  have  been  as  early  as  A.D.  1 50,  or  even  earlier. 
It  can  hardly  have  been  as  late  as  A.D.  170.  There 
is  something  attractive  in  the  suggestion  that,  although 
he  believed  that  on  some  grave  subjects  the  faith  and 
the  practice  of  the  orthodox  Churches  were  at  fault, 
he  cared  more  for  the  rescue  of  his  countrymen  from 
heathenism  than  for  the  correction  of  the  theological 
and  ethical  errors  of  those  who  had  found  eternal 
redemption  in  Christ.  Whatever  may  have  been  his 
motives,  he  returned  to  the  land  of  his  birth,  and 
preached  the  Christian  Gospel  to  men  who  had  not 
yet  received  it.  He  found  it  necessary  to  give  to  his 
converts  the  story  of  Christ  in  their  own  tongue  ; 
and  he  took  the  story  as  it  is  given  in  our  Four 
Gospels.  With  his  characteristic  audacity,  he  cut 
out  the  genealogies,  which  he  regarded  as  inconsis- 
tent with  a  true  conception  of  the  greatness  and  glory 


T ATI  AN.  169 

of  Christ  ;  and  he  did  not  shrink  from  tampering 
with  the  text  of  those  passages  which  he  retained. 
But  the  Gospels  which  he  used,  and  the  greater  part 
of  which  he  transferred  to  his  own  narrative,  were 
the  Gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  and 
he  used  no  others.  Why  did  he  use  all  the  Four? 
Why  did  he  use  these  alone?  He  had  broken  with 
the  orthodox  Churches,  and  was  beyond  their  con- 
trol. It  was  from  himself  that  the  Churches  for 
whose  use  his  narrative  was  prepared  had  received 
the  Christian  Faith.  He  was  free— absolutely  free — 
to  give  them  any  Gospel  that  he  chose.  I  ask  again. 
Why  did  he  give  them  a  Gospel  constructed  from  the 
Four  Gospels  which  are  still  in  our  hands  ? 

There  is  an  obvious  answer  to  this  question,  and  I 
think  that  the  obvious  answer  is  the  only  reasonable 
one.  When  he  left  Rome,  these  Four  Gospels  had  a 
unique  place  in  the  Christian  Churches  of  all  lands. 
He  knew  that  they  contained  the  real  and  authentic 
story  of  our  Lord's  life.  He  might  think  that  the 
genealogies  had  no  right  to  a  place  in  the  first  Gospel 
and  the  third.  He  thought  it  expedient  to  modify 
some  expressions  which  might  lead  his  converts  into 
theological  error.  But  if  he  had  to  give  his  converts 
a  narrative  of  our  Lord's  life,  it  was  a  matter  of 
course  that  he  should  give  them  the  story  that  had 
been  told  by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John.  This 
was  the  trustworthy  story  ;  he  could  give  no  other. 
And  although  he  had  tampered  with  the  text,  his 
Diatessaron  had  so  little  in  it  to  create  orthodox  sus- 


170  TATIAjV. 

picion,  and  contained  the  narrative  in  so  convenient  a 
form,  that  Ephraem,  tlie  glory  of  the  S)'rian  Church, 
expounded  it. 

On!}'  tliirteen  years  ago  the  evidence  Avhich  could 
be  alleged  in  support  of  the  traditional  theory  that 
Tatian's  Diatcsscxron  was  composed  of  our  Four  Gos- 
pels, though  in  my  judgment  sufficient,  was  scanty.^ 
To  Christian  apologists,  Tatian's  Address  to  the  Greeks 
contained  clear  proof  that  he  knew  the  Gospel  of 
John.  The  following  passages  seemed  to  place  this 
beyond  doubt  :  "  God  is  a  Spirit  "  (cap.  4).  "  And 
this  then  is  the  saying  :  The  dar]-:ncss  comprehendeth 
not  the  light"  (cap.  13).  '-Follow  ye  the  only  God. 
All  things  have  been  made  by  Him,  and  apart  from 
Him  hath  been  made  no  one  thing  "  (cap.  19).  But 
the  proof  was  declared  to  be  inadequate.  The  re- 
covery of  l^phraem's  Lectures,  and  of  the  Arabic 
translation  of  the  Diatessaron  has  wholly  changed 
the  conditions  of  the  controversy.  That  Tatian,  the 
friend  of  Justin  MartN'r,  knew  our  Four  Gospels, 
and  that  in  his  Diatessaron  he  worked  them  into  a 
continuous  narrative,  is  now  finally  demonstrated. 

VI. 

There  is  one  more  chapter  to  complete  the  story 
of  this  curious  work,  and  you  may  be  interested  in 
h.earing  it. 

I  have  already  told  you  that  Victor  of  Capua,  the 


Sec  pp.  155-159,  ante. 


T ATI  AN.  171 

author  of  several  commentaries  on  the  books  of  the 
Old  and  the  New  Testament,  and  of  a  work,  now 
lost,  on  the  true  method  of  determining  Easter,  met 
^^"ith  a  Latin  MS.  containing"  a  Harmony  of  the  Four 
Gospels.  That  was  about  A.D.  540.  The  MS.  had 
no  title  ;  but  finding  in  Eusebius  that  Tatian  had 
constructed  a  Diatessaron.,  he  attributed  it  to  Tatian. 
After  the  MS.  had  been  copied  under  his  direction, 
he  corrected  it,  and  then  published  it  Vv'ith  the  other 
books  of  the  New  Testament.^ 

Till  recently  it  was  the  general  opinion  of  scholars 
that  Victor  was  in  error  in  supposing  that  Tatian  was 
its  original  author.  One  piece  of  evidence  seemed  to 
be  decisive  :  Tatian's  Diatcssaroii  was  said  to  have 
begun  with  the  first  \-erscs  of  the  Gospel  of  John  ;  in 
Victor's  HaniioJiy  these  verses  are  preceded  b}-  four 
verses  from  the  Gospel  of  Luke.  But  the  publication 
of  Ephraem's  Lectures  on  the  Diatcssaron,  and  of  the 
Diatessaron  itself,  has  shown  that  Victor  ^^  as  right. 

The  order  in  which  the  contents  of  the  Four 
Gospels  are  arranged  by  Tatian  is  followed  with 
inconsiderable  variations  in  the  Latin  Hannoiiy  of 
Victor  ;  and  this  order  is  so  remarkable — I  might 
say  so  wayward  and  eccentric — that  the  coincidence 
could  not  ha\c  been  accidental.  Victor  corrected 
the  Latin  text  of  tjic  Ilaruiony,  and   modified   it  in 

'  This  is  known  as  the  Codex  Fiddcnsis  ;  it  contains,  in  addi- 
tion to  tlic  books  in  our  present  Canon,  the  apocryphal  EpisUc 
to  the  Laodiceans.  The  Codex  is  valuable  as  preserving  an 
early  text  of  the  Latin  \'ulgate  of  Jerome. 


172  TATIAX. 

other  ways  :  the  genealogies,  for  example,  and  some 
other  passages,  were  probably  inserted  by  him  ;  but 
the  Ilannony,  even  as  it  stands,  after  Victor's  revision, 
is  substantially  Tatian's.^ 

The  Harmony,  published  by  Victor — Tatian's 
Harmony — has  had  a  great  place  in  the  history  of 
the  Christian  Faith  in  Europe.  There  is  a  copy  of  it 
at  Fulda,  in  Hesse  Cassel,  which,  according  to  tradi- 
tion, was  in  the  hands  of  Boniface,  the  apostle  of 
Germany,  when  he  suffered  martyrdom.  It  is  sup- 
posed that  when  the  body  of  the  martyred  saint  was 
brought  to  Fulda  the  copy  of  the  Gospels  which  he 
loved  was  brought  with  it.  If  the  tradition  is  true — 
and  there  is  said  to  be  internal  evidence  that  the 
book  belonged  to  Boniface — the  great  missionary 
who  in  the  eighth  century  evangelized  the  heathen 
races  on  the  banks  of  the  Rhine  used  a  narrative  of 
our  Lord's  life  which  had  originally  been  prepared 
by  the  heretic  Tatian  for  converts  from  heathenism 
on  the  banks  (/  the  luiphrates. 

In  the  ninth  century  it  was  translated  into  the 
dialect  of  the  Eastern  Franks  ;  and  it  appears  to 
have  been  the  basis  of  a  poetical  life  of  our  Lord 
which  was  written  for  the  Southern  Franks,  and 
which  was  intended  to  be  sung  to  the  harp.  In 
the  same  century  it  furnished  the  substance  of   the 


'  Tlic  substanlial  identity  of  Victor's  Hanitony  with  Tatian's 
Diaicssaron  was  first  shown  by  Dr.  Wacc  in  the  E.vJ>osi/or, 
vol.  ii.,  Second  Scries,  pp.  12S-137  (iSSi). 


TATIAM.  173 

Hvliand,  which  is  described  by  its  editor  as  the 
greatest  monument  of  the  old  Saxon  language  in 
existence.  For  thirty  years  Charlemagne  had  en- 
deavoured to  compel  the  Saxons  to  accept  the 
Christian  Gospel.  They  abhorred  his  faith,  but  could 
not  resist  his  arms.  .They  submitted  to  baptism  as 
an  acknowledgment  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Franks, 
rather  than  as  a  confession  of  the  authority  and  grace 
of  Christ  ;  but  they  remained  heathen  still,  and  they 
preserved  the  superstitions  of  their  ancestors  by  sing- 
ing in  the  depths  of  their  forests  their  old  songs  in 
honour  of  their  old  gods.  When  Louis  the  Pious 
succeeded  his  father,  he  determined  on  a  kindlier  and 
more  effective  polic}'.  Had  not  the  story  of  Christ 
a  greater  charm  than  the  legends  of  Woden  and 
of  Thor  ?  If  the  Christian  story  could  be  told  in 
song  by  a  poet  of  genius,  it  might  perhaps  win  the 
hearts  of  the  wild  and  resolute  men  who,  while  they 
bore  the  Christian  name,  regarded  Christ  with  indif- 
ference or  hatred  as  the  God  of  their  conquerors.  At 
the  request  of  the  king  the  Hcliand  was  written — a 
noble  poem  telling  the  story  of  our  Lord  as  it  is  told 
in  the  Harmony  of  Victor.  According  to  its  editor, 
it  "  breathes  the  spirit  of  the  old  Saxon  nation  and 
customs  ;  and  the  diction  sometimes  rises  to  a  ver}- 
high  pitch  of  poetic  power  and  beauty.  There  is  no 
doubt,"  he  adds,  "that  the  benign  and  beautiful  doc- 
trines of  Christianity,  by  soothing  the  cars  of  ignorant 
heathen,  would  in  this  way  find  a  ready  access  to 
their  hearts." 


174  TATIAN. 

It  is  a  wonderful  story.  The  Diatcssaron  was  pre- 
pared by  a  heretic  in  tlie  second  century  for  the 
instruction  of  converts  from  heathenism  in  Assyria  ; 
in  the  eighth  century  and  the  ninth,  converts  from 
lieathenism  in  the  heart  of  Germany  learnt  from  it 
the  story  of  Christ.  Scholars  kmented  that  it  had 
been  lost  among  other  ticasures  of  the  East  ;  and 
when  within  the  last  few  years  it  was  discovered,  they 
learnt  that  it  had  been  known  in  the  West  for  1,300 
years.  There  was  rugged  ncss,  fierceness,  intolerance 
in  the  character  of  Tatian  ;  but  we  may  venture  to 
hope  that  there  was  also  a  genuine  and  even  pas- 
sionate love  for  his  Lord.  In  the  history,  could  he 
have  foreseen  it,  of  that  story  of  our  Lord's  life  which 
he  prepared  for  his  countr^-mcn,  he  would  have  found 
abundant  consolation  for  all  the  distrust  and  hatred 
with  which  he  \\-as  regarded  on  account  of  his  heresies. 
The  service  which  he  rendered  to  men  for  Christ's 
sake  Christ  has  gloriously  honoured. 

NOTE. 

To  tl'.ose  of  my  readers  who  wish  for  a  fuller  account 
of  ihc  Diatcssaron  and  its  recovery,  I  strongly  recommend 
Dr.  Hemphill's  Diatcssaron  of  Tatian  (London  :  Ilodder  & 
Stoiighion),  to  which  I  am  kirgo'y  indebted  for  the  material  of 
this  Lecture. 


LFXTURE  X. 

Ji'STIN  MARTYR. 

I. 

JUSTIN  MARTYR  was  born  at  Neapolis,  the 
modern  Nablous,  which  hes  in  the  beautiful 
valley  between  Mount  Gerizim  and  Mount  Ebal, 
near  to  Jacob's  Well  and  "  the  parcel  of  ground  that 
Jacob  gave  to  his  son  Joseph." 

His  parents  were  heathen,  and  in  his  Dialogue  ivith 
Trypho  he  tells,  with  considerable  grace,  humour, 
and  pathos,  the  story  of  his  early  studies.  To 
Justin,  philosophy  had  always  been,  and  it  always 
remained,  the  noblest  of  human  pursuits;  fi  .-  hn 
believed  that  its  aim  was  to  restore  man  to  God. 
But  he  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  disciples  of 
the  illustrious  men  who  first  ga\e  themselves  to  the 
great  search  after  the  supreme  truth  had  unhap[)ily 
forgotten  the  real  end  of  the  adventurous  inquiry ; 
and  so  it  ha(j  come  to  pass  that  I'latonists,  Stoics, 
Peripatetics,  and  the  rest,  were  more  lo)-al  to  tl:? 
authority  of  their  teachers  than  to  the  truth  itself. 
Justin's  first  master  was  a  Stoic  ;  but  he  sa}'s,  "after 
spending  a  considerable  time  with  him,  and   fmding 

175 


176  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


that  I  learnt  nothing  more  about  God — for  he  him- 
self knew  nothing-  and  said  that  such  knowledge  was 
unnecessary — I  left  him  and  went  to  another,  who 
was  called  a  Peripatetic,  and  who  in  his  own  opinion 
was  a  very  keen  and  clever  person."  In  the  course 
of  a  few  days  the  Peripatetic  asked  Justin  to  name 
the  fees  he  proposed  to  pay,  that  their  intercourse 
might  be  profitable  to  both  of  them.  Thereupon 
Justin  left  him,  thinking  that  a  man  who  was  anxious 
about  the  money  he  was  to  get  for  his  teaching  was 
no  true  philosopher.  Still  his  soul  was  possessed 
with  an  uncontrollable  desire  to  master  the  ultimate 
secret  of  the  universe,  and  he  attached  himself  to  a 
Pythagorean  who  had  a  great  reputation,  and  who 
had  an  immense  opinion  of  his  own  wisdom.  His 
new  master  asked  him  whether  he  had  studied  music, 
astronomy,  and  geometry;  "for,  surely,"  he  said,  "you 
do  not  hope  to  gaze  on  the  truths  which  perfect  the 
blessed  life  unless  }-ou  have  first  learnt  those  things 
which  draw  the  soul  from  the  things  of  sense,  disci- 
pline it  for  the  world  of  the  spirit,  and  so  enable  it 
to  behold  that  which  is  really  the  beautiful  and  the 
good."  Justin  lost  heart.  He  knew  nothing  of  music, 
astronom}',  and  geometry ;  he  thought  that  these 
branches  of  learning,  if  he  studied  them  to  any  pur- 
pose, would  occupy  him  for  many  years,  and  that  his 
passion  for  the  knowledge  of  God  would  remain  long 
unsatisfied.  He  could  not  endure  the  delay,  and  }-et 
he  was  sorry  to  go  to  another  master,  for  he  thought 
that  the   P}-thagorcan   had   some  real   knowledge  of 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  \^^ 

the  Divine  mystery,  which  he  longed  to  discover. 
But  the  Platonists  had  a  great  name,  and  a  teacher 
of  Platonism  settled  in  Ncapolis;^  Justin  therefore 
resolved  to  try  Platonism.  He  devoted  a  great  part 
of  every  day  to  his  new  master,  and  soon  began  to 
glow  with  enthusiasm  for  the  Platonic  doctrine. 
Now,  at  last,  his  thought  was  moving  in  regions 
lying  beyond  and  above  the  vicissitudes  and  illusions 
of  material  things.  The  contemplation  of  those 
Eternal  Ideas  in  which  Plato  found  the  ultimate 
truth  and  reality  of  all  things  gave  his  mind  wings, 
and  he  trusted  that  soon  he  would  have  an  immediate 
vision  and  knowledge  of  God  ;  "  for  this  is  the  end 
of  the  Platonic  philosophy." 

While  he  was  possessed  with  these  great  hopes, 
it  was  his  custom  to  go  to  a  lonely  spot  not  far 
from  the  sea  for  purposes  of  meditation.  On  one 
memorable  day  his  solitude  was  disturbed.  He  was 
followed  by  an  aged,  venerable  man,  with  gentle 
manners,  who  explained  to  Justin  that  he  had  been 
anxious  about  some  of  the  members  of  his  household 
who  were  away  from  home,  and  that  he  had  come 
to  that  lonely  place  to  see  whether  there  was  any 
chance  of  their  returning — an  explanation  in  which, 
under  a  thin  and  transparent  veil,  he  indicates  that 


^  It  seems  natural  to  suppose  that  Justin's  plirase  "our  city" 
refers  to  the  city  of  his  birth  rather  than  to  Ephesus,  in  which, 
according  to  Euscbius,  the  scene  of  the  conversation  with 
Trypho  is  laid. 

L.  C  12 


178  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


Justin  was  a  brother  of  his  whom  he  hoped  to  bring 
back  to  the  home  of  the  P'ather  of  all.  Justin,  of 
course,  does  not  profess  to  recognise  his  meaning,  but 
explains  in  return  why  it  is  that  he  seeks  solitude. 
Then  the  two  begin  to  discuss  some  of  the  higher 
questions  of  philosophy — the  difference  between  the 
knowledge  which  is  given  in  the  ordinary  sciences 
and  the  knowledge  of  God  ;  whether  it  is  possible 
to  know  God  ;  the  true  nature  of  the  soul,  and  its 
immortality.  The  stranger  then  tells  Justin  that  long 
before  the  times  of  those  who  were  reverenced  as 
philosophers  there  lived  certain  prophets  —  men 
righteous,  blessed,  and  dear  to  God,  who  spoke  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Their  writings 
were  still  in  existence,  and  contained  great  discoveries 
concerning  the  origin  and  the  end  of  all  things,  and 
concerning  other  matters  which  ought  to  be  known 
to  the  philosopher.  Then  he  went  on  to  speak  of 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  "  Ikit,"  said  the  stranger, 
"these  things  are  not  to  be  seen  and  understood  by 
all  men,  but  only  by  those  to  whom  it  is  given  to 
understand  them  by  God  and  by  His  Christ ;  pray, 
therefore,  that  above  all  things  the  gates  of  light  may 
be  opened  to  thcc."  When  he  had  said  these  and 
many  other  things,  he  went  awa\',  and  Justin  never 
saw  him  again. 

From  that  time  a  fire  was  kindled  in  Justin's 
soul — a  fire  that  was  never  extinguished.  He  came 
to  have  a  great  love  for  the  Jewish  prophets  and  for 
the  friends  of  Christ.       He  found  in  them  what  he 


JUSTIN  M.IRTVN.  179 


had  not  found  in  the  writhigs  of  the  philosophers. 
He  left  the  school  of  Plato  for  the  school  of  Christ. 

This  is  the  story  which  Justin  tells  of  his  own  con- 
version in  the  Dialogue  iL'itli  Trypho.  Else^vhcre  he 
says  that  while  he  was  delighting  in  the  doctrines  of 
Plato  the  courage  with  which  the  Christians  met 
death  and  all  other  terrible  things  convinced  him 
that  they  could  not  be  guilty  of  the  secret  crimes 
with  which  they  were  charged  by  their  enemies.^ 

It  is  apparent  that  to  Justin  the  Christian  Gospel 
was,  first  of  all,  a  revelation  of  things  invisible  and 
Divine.  It  v/as  more  than  this — it  brought  to  a  sin- 
ful race  the  assurance  of  the  infinite  mercy  of  God, 
and  it  proclaimed  the  gift  of  eternal  life  ;  but  it  was 
in  his  search  for  wisdom  that  he  found  Christ.  For 
him  the  Gospel  was  also  a  philosophy  ;  it  satisfied 
his  unquenchable  thirst  for  the  knowledge  of  God. 

He  remained  a  philosopher  after  he  became  a 
Christian,  and  still  wore  the  philosopher's  cloak.  It 
was  the  business  of  his  life  to  make  known  the  truth 
which  God  had  made  known  to  him.  If  through  his 
fault  other  men  were  ignorant  of  the  Christian  revela- 
tion, the  guilt  of  the  sin  from  which  the  knowledge 
of  Christ  would  have  saved  them  would  be  his.- 
And  so  he  was  eager  to  explain  his  new  Faith  to 
every  man,  and  was  ready  to  discuss  it  \\ith  all  sorts 
of  people.  There  was  nothing  in  kim  of  the  savage 
fierceness   v.ith  which   Tatian    assaulted   heathenism, 


1  Second  Apology^  cap.  12.  "^  First  Apology,  cap.  3. 


I  So  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 

but  there  was  a  quiet  courage  which  no  peril  could 
subdue. 

We  know  little  of  his  life  after  his  conversion, 
except  that  it  was  spent  in  illustrating  and  defending 
the  Gospel  of  Christ.  He  taught  in  Rome,  and 
perhaps  in  Ephesus.  The  date  of  his  martyrdom  is 
uncertain.  It  may  have  been  as  early  as  A.D.  148  :  it 
may  have  been  as  late  as  A.D.  163.^ 

Of  his  works,  some  of  the  most  important  arc  lost. 
The  most  valuable  of  these  is  that  which  he  had 
written  Against  all  the  Heresies.  He  refers  to  it  in 
his  First  Apology  (cap.  26).  Some  of  the  books 
which  have  been  attributed  to  him  can  hardly  be  his. 
There  remain  his  First  Apology,  which  was  written, 
as  he  says,  about  150  years  after  the  birth  of  our 
Lord,  and  was  addressed  to  the  Emperor  Marcus 
Antoninus  ;  his  Second  Apology ;  and  his  Dialogue 
with  Trypho  the  Jew.  That  these  three  were  written 
by  Justin  is  universally  acknowledged. 

11. 

In  his  First  Apology  he  describes  the  weekly 
assemblies  of  the  Christians  : 


*  "After  a  complete  examination  of  the  evidence,  IMr.  Ilort 
concludes  that  '  we  may,  witlioiil  fear  of  considerable  error,  set 
down  Justin's  First  Apology  to  145  or  better  still  to  146,  and 
his  death  to  148.  The  Second  Apology,  if  really  separate  from 
the  First,  will  then  fall  in  146  or  147,  and  the  Dialogue  xvith 
Trypho  about  the  same  time.' '' — Westcott  :  Canon  of  New 
'Festamcnl,  p.  99. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  i8l 


"  On  the  day  called  Sunday  all  who  live  in  cities  or  in  the 
country  gather  together  to  one  place,  and  the  Memoirs  of  ilie 
Apostles,  or  the  writings  of  the  prophets,  are  read  as  long  as 
time  permits.  Then,  when  the  reader  has  ceased,  the  presi- 
dent verbally  instructs  and  exhorts  to  the  imitation  of  these 
good  things.  Then  we  all  rise  together  and  pray,  and,  as  we 
before  said,  when  our  prayer  is  ended,  bread  and  wine  and 
water  arc  brought,  and  the  president,  in  like  manner,  offers 
prayers  and  thanksgivings  according  to  his  ability,  and  the 
people  assent,  saying,  Amen.  And  there  is  a  distribution  to 
each,  and  a  participation  of  that  over  which  thanks  have  been 
given  ;  and  to  those  who  are  absent  a  portion  is  sent  by  the 
deacons.  And  they  who  are  well  to  do  and  willing  give  what 
each  thinks  fit  ;  and  what  is  collected  is  deposited  with  the 
president,  who  succours  the  orphans  and  widows,  and  those 
who,  through  sickness  or  any  other  cause,  are  in  want,  and 
those  who  are  in  bonds,  and  the  strangers  sojourning  among 
us  ;  and,  in  a  word,  takes  care  of  all  who  are  in  need." ' 

This  was  how  Christians  met  for  worship  in  the 
year  A.D.  150  or  earlier.  There  is  a  beautiful  and 
pathetic  simplicity  in  the  picture.  They  were  brothers 
and  sisters  in  Christ ;  they  sat  at  His  table  ;  they 
remembered  orphans  and  widows,  the  sick,  the  poor, 
and  strangers  who  were  their  guests,  and  relieved 
them.  They  were  in  peril  of  suffering  loss  of  pro- 
perty, imprisonment,  and  death  as  the  penalty  of 
their  Christian  faith.  While  they  were  sitting  at  the 
Lord's  Table  they  were  reminded  of  their  peril  ;  for 
one  of  the  objects  for  which  their  contributions  were 
collected  was  to  give  relief  to  those  who  were  "  in 
bonds  "  for  Christ's  sake. 

'  First  Apoloi;-)',  cap.  67  ('' Ante-Nicene  Library"  transla- 
tion). 


iS2  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


In  several  otlicr  places  in  his  First  Apology  Justin 
speaks  of  these  ]\Iciuoirs  of  the  Apostles,  ^\'hich  he 
says  were  read  in  the  Christian  assemblies.  He 
says  : 

"  The  animal  of  CJod  who  was  sent  to  the  same  virgin  at  that 
time  brought  her  good  news,  saying,  '  Behold,  thou  shalt  con- 
ceive of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  shalt  bear  a  Son,  and  He  shall  be 
called  the  Son  of  the  Highest,  and  thou  shalt  call  His  name 
Jesus  ;  for  He  shall  save  His  people  from  their  sins,'  as  iJiey 
who  have  recorded  all  that  concerns  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ 
have  taught." — First  Apology,  cap.  33. 

"  The  apostles  in  the  Memoirs  composed  by  them,  which  arc 
called  Gospels,  have  thus  delivered  unto  us  what  was  enjoined 
upon  them — that  Jesus  took  bread,  and,  when  He  had  given 
thanks,  said,  '  This  do  ye  in  remembrance  of  Me  ;  this  is  My 
body';  and  that  after  the  same  manner,  having  taken  the  cup 
and  given  thanks,  He  said,  '  This  is  My  blood,'  and  gave  it  to 
them  alone." — Ibid.,  cap.  66. 

In  the  Dialogue  with  Trypho  there  are  the  follow- 
ing references  to  the  ISIeiiioirs : 

''  He  called  one  of  His  disciples — previously  known  by  the 
name  of  Simon — Peter  ;  since  he  recognised  Him  to  be  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God,  by  the  revelation  of  the  Father ;  and  since  we 
find  it  recorded  in  the  Memoirs  of  the  Apostles  that  He  is  the 
Son  of  God  ;  and  since  we  call  Him  the  Son,  we  have  under- 
stood that  He  proceeded  before  all  creatures  from  the  Father 
by  His  power  and  will,  and  that  He  became  man  by  the 
Virgin." — Dialogue  icith  Trypho,  cap.  100. 

"When  He  came  out  of  the  water,  the  Holy  Ghost  lighted 
on  Him  like  a  dove  [as]  the  apostles  of  this  very  Christ  of  ours 
ivrotc^'—lbid.,  cap.  88. 

"They  that  saw  Him  crucified  .  .  .  spake  in  mockery 
the  words  which  are  recorded  in  the  Memoirs  of  His  Apostles  : 
'  He  said  that  He  was  the  Son  of  God  :  let  Him  come  down  ; 
let  God  save  Him.'" — Hud.,  cap.  loi. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  183 


"  He  kept  .'.  .ice  and  chose  to  return  no  answer  to  any  one 
in  the  prescn  f.  of  Pilate,  as  has  been  declared  in  the  Memoirs 
of  the  Aposli  .P — Ibid.^  cap.  102. 

"  I  have  a' ready  proved  that  He  was  the  only  begotten  of  the 
Father  of  all  things,  being  begotten  in  a  pecuhar  manner,  Word 
and  Power  by  Him,  and  having  afterwards  Ijecome  man  through 
the  virgin,  as  we  have  learned  from  the  Memoirs." — Ibid.,  cap. 
105. 

''Wh.en  Christ  was  giving  up  the  spirit  on  the  cross.  He  said, 
'  Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  commend  My  spirit,'  as  I  learned 
also  fiom  the  Memoirs." — //'/;/.,  cap.  105. 

"  In  the  Memoirs,  which  I  say  were  drawn  up  by  the  apostle':, 
and  t/tose  ivlio  foUoivcd  tliem  [it  is  recorded]  that  His  sweat  fell 
down  like  drops  of  blood  while  He  was  praying,  and  saying, 
'If  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup  pass.'" — Ibid.,  cap.  103. 

"In  the  Gospel  it  is  written  that  He  said,  'All  things  are 
dchvered  unto  Me  by  My  Father'  ;  and  '  No  man  knowcth  the 
Father  but  the  Son,  nor  the  Son  but  the  Father,  and  they  to 
whom  the  Son  will  reveal  Him.'" — Ibid.,  cap.  100. 

Trypho  is  represented  as  saying  : 

"  I  am  aware  that  your  precepts  in  the  so  called  Gospel  z^yc  so 
wonderful  and  so  great  that  I  suspect  no  one  can  keep  them  ; 
for  I  have  carefully  read  ih(tm." — Ibid.,  cap.  10. 

I  might  quote  other  passages,  but  these  are  suffi- 
cient for  my  purpose. 

The  "  Memoirs,''  the  "  Memoirs  of  His  Apostles"  the 
"  Memoirs  draivn  up  by  the  Apostles  and  those  zvho 
followed  tlicm"  the  "  Memoirs  composed  by  them  [the 
apostles],  ivhich  are  called  Gospels": — how  could 
Justin  have  described  more  accurately  the  four  nar- 
ratives of  our  Lord's  life  which  are  contained  in  the 
New  Testament  ?  Matthew  and  John  were  apostles 
Mark  and  Luke  were  followers  of  the  apostles ;  and 


l84  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 

it  is  deserving  of  notice  that  in  the  passage  in  which 
Justin  describes  the  Memoirs  as  having  been  drawn 
up,  not  merely  by  the  apostles,  but  by  their  followers, 
he  is  about  to  mention  a  fact  which  is  recorded  only 
in  the  Gospel  of  Luke.^  In  the  quotations  which 
I  have  read,  you  have  already  recognised  passages, 
or  references  to  passages,  with  which  you  are  familiar 
in  our  Gospels. 

III. 

The  worth  of  Justin's  testimony  is  challenged  be- 
cause he  does  not  say  explicitly  that  the  Memoirs 
which  were  read  in  the  Christian  assemblies  in  his 
time  were  written  by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John. 
Why  did  he  not  give  the  names  of  the  writers?  How 
can  we  tell  that  these  Memoirs,  which  Justin  says 
were  called  Gospels,  were  the  same  Gospels  that  are 
in  our  hands  to-day  ? 

The  answer  to  this  question  may  be  given  in  a 
single  sentence.  When  Christian  writers  in  the 
second  and  third  centuries  were  addressing  those 
who  were  not  Christians,  they  did  not  appeal  by 
name  to  the  sacred  books  of  the  Church.  Why 
should  they  ?  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John  were 
no  authorities  to  those  who  had  not  received  the 
Christian  Faith.  The  practice  of  Justin  was  the 
practice  of  the  other  apologists.      Tatian,  as  we  have 

'  "His  sweat  fell  down  like  drops  [of  blood]  while  He  was 
praying." — Dialogue  with  Tryp/io,  cap.  103.     See  Luke  x.xii.  44. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  185 


seen,  composed  a  Harmony  of  the  Gospels.  In  his 
Address  to  the  Greeks,  though  there  are  allusions  to 
passages  in  the  First  Gospel  and  the  Fourth,  he  never 
names  either  Matthew  or  John.  Tertullian,  when  he 
is  writing  for  Christians,  uses  the  Gospels  as  freely 
as  they  are  used  by  any  modern  preacher,  and  names 
their  writers,  but  in  his  Apology  their  names  are  not 
once  mentioned.  But  I  repeat  that  our  Gospels  could 
not  be  described  more  accurately  than  they  are  de- 
scribed by  Justin.  They  are  Memoirs,  Recollections, 
not  regular  and  complete  biographies  ;  and  they  were 
drawn  up  by  "  apostles  and  those  who  followed 
them." 

I  have  already  given  a  considerable  number  of 
passages  in  which  Justin  either  quotes  the  Memoirs 
or  refers  to  the  facts  which  they  record.  In  the  three 
works  of  Justin,  which  are  universally  acknowledged 
as  genuine.  Otto  of  Jena,  who  has  edited  Justin's 
works,  finds  more  than  200  passages  in  which  there 
are  either  quotations  from  our  Gospels  or  references 
to  them.  From  these  quotations  or  references  every 
one  of  our  Four  Gospels  receives  support.  For 
example :  in  the  Dialogue  zvith  Trypho  Justin 
writes,  "  Wherefore  also  our  Christ  said  [when  He 
was]  on  earth  to  those  who  were  affirming  that  Elijah 
must  come  before  Christ  :  '  Elijah  shall  come  and 
restore  all  things  ;  but  I  say  unto  you  that  Elijah  has 
already  come,  and  they  knew  him  not,  but  have  done 
to  him  whatsoever  they  chose.' "  The  quotation  so 
far  is  almost  a  verbally  exact  quotation  from  Matthew ; 


iS6  JUSTIiY  MARTYR. 


but  the  substance  of  it  is  found  in  Luke.  But  Justin 
adds,  "  And  it  is  written,  '  Then  the  disciples  under- 
stood that  He  spake  to  them  about  John  the  Bap- 
tist.' "  ^  This  is  an  exact  quotation  from  Matthew, 
and  is  found  in  JMattJiciv  only.  Again,  Justin  says 
that  our  Lord  changed  the  names  of  the  two  sons  of 
Zcbedee  to  Boanerges.-  This  fact  is  necorded  by 
Mark  only.  Again,  he  quotes  the  words  of  our  Lord 
on  the  cross,  "  Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  commend 
My  spirit."^  These  words  are  found  in  Luke  only. 
Finally,  he  quotes  our  Lord  as  saying,  "  Except  ye  be 
born  again,  ye  shall  not  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."^  The  quotation  is  not  verbally  exact,  but 
it  is  very  difficult,  I  think,  to  resist  the  conviction 
that  Justin  had  in  his  mind  the  two  sayings  of  our 
Lord  recorded  by  John,  and  recorded  by  Jolui  only  : 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  anew,  he  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God."  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water 
and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of 
God." 

IV. 

This  last  passage  suggests  another  objection  to 
the  argument  resting  on  Justin's  quotations.  It  is 
alleged  that  in  a  large  number  of  instances  the 
quotations  from  the  Memoirs  do  not  exactly  corre- 
spond  to  the  text  of  our   Four.  Gospels,  and   that, 


'  Dialogue  ivith  TtypJio,  cap.  49.  "  Ibid.,  cap.  106. 

^  Ibid.,  cap.  105.  •*  First  Ajiclogy,  cap.  61. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  187 

therefore,  it  is  probable  that  Justin  quoted  from 
Gospels  which  have  now  disappeared.  It  is  assumed 
that  our  own  Gospels,  which  are  attributed  to 
Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  preserve  a  large 
part  of  the  contents  of  these  more  ancient  narratives  ; 
but  that  the  lost  Gospels  contained  an  earlier  and 
therefore  more  trustworthy  account  of  our  Lord's 
life  and  teaching. 

The  objection  is  untenable.  Justin  quotes  forty- 
eight  passages  from  the  Pentateuch  :  eighteen  are 
quoted  exactly,  nineteen  with  slight  variations, 
eleven  with  marked  divergence.  He  quotes  twenty- 
one  jfassages  from  the  Psalms  :  sixteen  exactly,  in- 
cluding nine  {or  ten)  zuhole  Psalms,  two  with  slight 
variations,  three  with  decided  variations.  He  quotes 
fifty-three  passages  from  Isaiah  : .  twenty-five  exactly, 
twelve  with  slight  variations,  sixteen  with  decided 
variations.^  Are  we  to  conclude  that  we  have  a  later 
Pentateuch,  a  later  Psalter,  a  later  Isaiah  than  Justin 
had  ;  that  Justin's  Pentateuch,  Justin's  Psalter,  Jus- 
tin's Isaiah  have  been  lost  and  have  left  no  trace  of 
their  existence  behind  them  ;  and  that  although  our 
Pentateuch,  Psalter,  and  Isaiah  contain  a  large  part 
of  the  materials  which  were  found  in  the  more  ancient 
books,  the  materials  have  been  re-arranged  by  some 
later  hand,  supplemented  by  later  traditions,  modified 
and  coloured  under  the  inliucnce  of  later  forms  of 
theological   thought?     The  inference  is  an  ob\iously 

'  S.\ND.\v  :  Gospels  in  iJic  Second  Century,  pp.  1 1 1,  112. 


158  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


impossible  one.  The  Jews  arc  the  trust\\orthy  custo- 
dians of  their  sacred  books. 

The  explanation  of  the  inexactness  of  a  large 
proportion  of  Justin's  quotations  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  very  simple,  and  does  not  require  any 
hypothesis  of  a  lost  Pentateuch,  a  lost  Psalter,  a  lost 
Isaiah.  For  Justin  to  have  verified  all  the  passages 
that  he  quoted  would  have  been  a  troublesome  and 
tedious  business  ;  and  therefore  he  left  many  of  them 
unverified. 

A  modern  writer,  if  he  is  not  quite  sure  of  the 
passage  which  he  is  quoting,  can  easily  turn  it  up. 
When  he  does  not  remember  chapter  and  verse,  his 
eye  can  run  over  page  after  page  without  difficulty 
till  he  discovers  the  words  which  he  is  hunting  for. 
If  after  a  few  minutes'  search  he  is  still  at  fault,  he  has 
his  Concordance.  Justin  had  no  Concordance,  and 
to  find  a  passage  in  aclums}',  unhandy,  ancient  manu- 
script was  a  much  more  laborious  matter  than  to  find 
it  in  a  printed  book.  And,  therefore,  he  generally 
trusted  his  memory,  but  his  memory  often  failed  him. 
lie  gave  the  substance  of  the  text,  but  missed  the 
exact  words  ;  sometimes  he  ran  two  sentences  into 
one.  The  figures  which  I  have  given  show  that  this 
explanation  is  the  true  one.  Of  the  sixteen  exact 
quotations  from  the  Psalms,  nine  (or  ten)  arc  xvhole 
Psalms  ;  when  he  wanted  to  quote  a  whole  Psalm, 
he  naturally  distrusted  his  memor}',  and  he  therefore 
turned  to  the  Psalter  and  copied  the  exact  text.  P"or 
shorter  quotations,  if  he  was  sure  of  the  substance 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  189 

of  the  text,  it  was  not  worth  while  to  take  so  much 
trouble. 

His  quotations  from  the  first  three  Gospels  are, 
however,  much  less  exact  than  even  his  quotations 
from  the  Old  Testament.  Of  "  direct  quotations," 
Professor  Sanday  finds  sixty-seven  ;  ten  are  substan- 
tially exact  ;  twenty-five  present  slight  variations  ; 
thirty-two  marked  variations.^  There  is  a  simple 
and  natural  explanation  of  this  greater  inexactness. 
He  knew  the  Gospels  very  much  better  than  he 
knew  the  Old  Testament,  and  he  therefore  verified 
his  New  Testament  quotations  less  frequently. 
Verbal  accuracy  was  not  essential  to  his  purpose. 
The  books  in  which  the  quotations  occur  are  not 
commentaries  :  two  of  them  arc  defences  of  the 
Christian  faith  against  heathenism  ;  the  third  is  a 
controversial  discussion  with  a  Jew.  If  he  gave  the 
substance  of  the  passages  which  he  quoted  from  the 
Gospels,  it  was  enough. 

^  5'»NDA^■  :  The  Gospels  in  the  Second  Century,  pp.  11 4- 116. 
The  following-  note  deserves  to  be  considered  :  "  A  somewhat 
similar  classification  has  been  made  by  De  Wette,  Einleitung 
in  das  N.  T..  pp.  104-1 10,  in  which,  however,  the  standard  seems 
somewhat  lower  than  that  which  I  have  assumed  ;  several 
variations  which  I  had  classed  as  decided  l)e  Wette  considers 
to  be  only  slight.  I  hope  I  may  consider  this  a  proof  that  the 
classification  above  given  has  not  been  influenced  by  bias." 


JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


V. 

The  question  whether  these  Memoirs  of  Churcli 
Apostles,  these  "Gospels"  which  Justin  used,  and 
which  in  his  time  were  read  every  Sunday  in  the 
Christian  assemblies,  were  the  same  as  our  Gospels 
can  be  tried  in  another  way.  What  account  did  the 
Memoirs  give  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  His  history 
and  His  teaching?    Listen  to  the  folIo\\-ing  summary.^ 

According  to  Justin,  the  Messiah 
was  born,  without  sin,  of  a  virgin 
li'lio  was  descended  from  David, 
J.l.ut.  i.  2-6.  Jesse,  Phares,  Judah,  Jacob,  Isaac,  Luke  lii.  3i-;4. 
and  Abraham,  if  not  (the  reading 
here  is  doubtful)  from  Adam  himself. 

To   Mary   it   was    announced   by 
the  angcl  Gabriel  that,  while  yet  a  Lu!:e  i.  26. 
virgin,  the  power  of  God,  or  of  the  Luke  i.  35. 
Highest,  should  overshadow  her,  and 
she  should  conceive  and  bear  a  son  l-uke  i.  31. 
Matt.  i.  21.  whose  name  she  should  call  Jesus, 
because  He  should  save  His  peojile 
from  their  sins. 

Joseph  observing  that   Mary,  his 

Matt.  i.  13-13.  espoused,  was  with  child,  was  warned 

in   a  dream  not   to   put    her  away, 

because  that  which  was  in  her  womb 

was  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     Thus  the 

IVfatt.  i.  23.  prophecy,   Isaiah   vii.    14    ("Behold 


*  Justin's  references  and  allusions  to  our  Lord's  history  were 
collected  by  Credner  and  Hilgenfeld,  and  have  been  thrown 
by  Professor  Sanday  into  what  he  calls  "  a  sort  of  running  nar- 
rative." This  narrative  I  have  given  in  the  text.  See  Gospels 
in  (he  Second  Cculuyy,  pp.  91-98. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  191 

the  virgin,"  etc.)  was  fiilhllcd.     The 
motber  of    John    the    IJaptist    was  Luke  i  57. 
Elizabeth.      The   birthplace   of  the 
Messiah  had  been  indicated  by  the 
Mail.  ii.  5,  6.  prophecy  of  Micah  (v.  2,  "Bethle- 
hem not  the  least  among  the  princes 
of  Judah'').     There  He  was  born,  as 
the   Romans   might   learn  from  the 
census  taken  by  Cyrenius,  the  first  LuUc  ii.  i,  2. 
procttrafor  of  Jiidaa.     His   life  ex- 
tended   from    Cyrenius    to    Pontius 
Pilate.     So,  in  consequence  of  this, 
the   first   census   in    Juda?a,  Joseph 
went   up   from  Nazareth,   where   h,e 
dwelt,    to     IJethlchem,    i^'hcncc    lie  i-i>kc  ii.  4- 
Ti'a,s-,   as   a  member  of  the  tribe  of 
Ji'.dah.     The  parents  of  Jesus  could 
find  no  lodgings  in  Bethlehem,  so  it  l-ukcii.  7. 
came  to  pass  that  He  was  born  in 
a  cave  near  the  village^   and  laid  in  AW. 
a  manger.     At  His  birth  there  came 
Matt.  ii.  I.  magiy>vw  Arabia,  who  knew  by  a 
star  that  had  appeared  in  the  heaven 
Matt.  ii.  2.  that  a  King  had  been  born  in  Juda:a. 
I\iatt.  ii.  II.  Having  paid  Him  their  homage,  and 
offered  gifts   of  gold,  frankincense, 
iMatt.  ii.  12.  and   myrrh,  they   were  warned  not 
Malt.  ii.  1-7.  to  return  to  Herod,  whom  they  had 
consulted  on  the  way.     He  however, 
not    willing    that   the   child    should 
Matt.  ii.  16.  escape,   ordered   a  massacre  of  all 
the  children  in  Bethlehem,  fiillilling 

w'ait.  ii.  17,  iR.  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  xxxi.  15 
("  Rachel  weeping  for  children,"'  etc.). 

M.-itt.  ii.  13-15.  Joseph  and  his  wife  meanwhile,  with 
the  Babe,  had  fled  to  Kgypt  ;  for  the 
Father  resolved  that  He  to  whom 
He  liad  given  birth  should  not  die 


192  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 

before   He  had  preached  His  word 
as  a  man.     There  they  stayed  until 
Matt.  ii.  22.  Archclaus    succeeded     Herod,    and 
then  returned. 

By  process  of  nature  He  grew  to 
the  age  of  thirty  years  or  more,  not  Luke  iii.  23. 
comely  of  aspect  {as  had  been  pro- 
phesied),  practising  the  trade  of 
Matt.  vi.  3.  a  carpenter,  making  ploughs  and 
yokes.,  emblems  of  righteousness. 
He  remained  hidden  till  John,  the 
herald  of  His  coming,  came  forward, 
Matt  xvii.  12,13.  the  spirit  of  Elias  being  in  him  ;  and 

Matt.  iii.  2.  as  he  sat  by  the  river  Jordan,  cried  Luke  iii.  3. 

to  men  to  repent.     As  he  preached 
Matt.  iii.  4.  in  his  wild  garb,   he  declared  that 

he  was  not  the  Christ,  but  that  One  (John  i.  xg  (r.) 
M.itt.  iii.  II,  12.  stronger  than  he  was  coming  after  Luke  iii,  16,  17. 
him,  whose  shoes  he  was  not  worthy 
to  bear,  etc.     The  later  history  of 
John    Justin    also    mentions,    how, 
RLitt.,\iv.  3.  having   been    put    in    prison,    at   a  Luke  iii.  20. 
feast    on   Herod's  birthday,  he  was 
Malt.  .\iv.  6  ff.  beheaded   at    the    instance    of   his 
sister's   daughter.      This  John    was 
Matt.  .xvii.  H-13.  Elias,  who  was  to  come  before  the 
Christ. 

At  the  baptism  of  Jesus  a  fire 
was  kindled  on  the  Jordan.,  and,  as 
He  went  up  out  of  the  water,  the 
M.itt.  iii.  16.  Holy  Ghost  alighted  upon  Him,  and  Lvike  iii.  21,  22. 
a  voice  was  heard  from  heaven, 
saying,  in  the  words  of  David, 
"Thou  art  My  Son;  this  day  have 
I  begotten  Thee:' 
Matt.  iv.  1-9.  After  His  baptism  He  was  tempted 
by  the  devil,  who  ended  by  claiming 
homage  from  Him.     To  this  Christ 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  103 


replied,     "  Get     thee     behind     Me, 
Matt.  iv.  n.  Satan,"  etc.     So  the  devil  departed  Lukeiv.  13. 
from  Him  at  that  time,  worsted  and 
convicted. 

Justin  knew  that  the  words  of 
Jesus  were  short  and  concise,  not 
like  those  of  a  sophist.  That  He 
wrought  miracles  might  be  learnt 
from  the  Acts  of  Pontius  Pilate, 
Matt.  ix.  29-31,  fulfilling  Isaiah  xxxv.  4-6.  Those  Luke xviii.  35-43 
32, 33,  X.  I-  .    ^^^j^^  ixom.    their  birth  were    blind,  Luke  v.''i7-26. 

iSlatt.  iv.  23.  dumb,    lame.    He    healed  ;    indeed, 
Matt.  ix.  iS  ii.  He  healed  all  sickness  and  disease,  Luke  viii.  41  ff. 
and  He  raised  the  dead.     The  feius  Luke  vii.  11-18. 
ascribed  these  miracles  to  magic. 

Jesus  too  (like  John,  luhose  mission 

ceased  whett  He  appeared  iit  public) 

Matt.  iv.  17.  began  His  ministry  by  proclaiming 

that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  was  at 

hand.   Many  precepts  of  the  Sermon 

Matt.  V.  20.  on  the  Mount  Justin  has  preserved, 

[as,  for  example,  those  referring  to] 

Matt.  V.  28.  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and 

Matt.  V.  29-32.  Pharisees,  the  adultery  of  the  heart, 

Matt.v. 34-37, 39.  the    offending    eye,    divorce,    oaths, 

Matt.  V.  44.  returning  good  for  evil,  loving  and 

Matt.  V.  42.  praying  for  enemies,  giving  to  those  Luke  vi.  30. 

Matt.  vi.  19, 20.  that   need,  placing   the  treasure  in 

M.iit.  vi.  25-27.  heaven,  not  caring  for  bodily  wants,  Lukexii.  22-24. 

Matt.  V.  45.  but  copying  the  mercy  and  goodness 
Matt.  vi.  21,  etc.  of  God,  not  acting  from  worldly 
Matt.  vii.  22, 23.  motives — above  all,  deeds,  not  words.  Luke  xlii.  26,  27. 

Justin   quotes    sayings    from    the 
Matt.  viii.  II,  12.  narrative  of  the  centurion  of  Caper-  Luke  xiii.  28,  29. 
Matt.  ix.  13.  naum  and  of  the  feast  in  the  house  Luke  v.  32. 

of  Matthew.     He  has  the  choosing 
Matt.  X.  I  ff.  of   the    twelve    apostles,    with    the  Lul.e  vi.  13. 
Mark  iii.  17.  name  given  to  the  sons  of  Zebcdee, 

L.  C.  13 


194  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


Boanerges,   or   "  sons   of   thunder," 
Matt.  xi.  12-15.  the  commission  of  the  apostles,  the  Luke  x.  19. 
discourse  after  the  departure  of  the  Luke  xvi.  16. 
Matt.  xvi.  4.  messengers  of  John,  the  sign  of  the 
Matt.  xiii.  3  ff.  prophct   Jonas,  the   parable   of  the 
Rfatt.  xvi.  1S-18.  sower,    Peter's    confession,    the    an- Luke  viii.  5  ff. 
Matt.  xvi.  21.  nouncement  of  the  Passion.  Luke  ix.  22. 

From    the    account    of   the    last 
journey  and   the  closing   scenes  of 
M.itt.  xix.  16, 17.  our  Lord's  life,  Justin  has  the  history 
M.itt.  xxi.  I  ff.  of  the  rich   young   man,  the   entry  Luke xviii.  18,19. 

into  Jerusalem,  the  cleansing  of  the  Luke  xix.  29  ff. 
Matt.  xxii.  II.  temple,  the   wedding   garment,   the  Luke  xix.  46. 

controversial   discourses   about    the  Luke  xx.  22-25. 
Mutt.  xxii.  21.  tribute  money,  the  resurrection,  and  Lukexx.  35,  36. 
M.-»tt.xxii.  37,3s.  the   greatest    commandment,    those 

Matt,  xxiii.  2  tf.  .  1         t-h        •  1 

Matt.  XXV.  34, 41.  directed  agamst  the  Pharisees,  and  Luke  xi.  42-52. 

Matt.  XXV.  14-30.  the    eschatological    discourse,    the 

parable    of    the    talents.       Justin's 

account   of   the    institution    of    the 

Lord's   Supper  agrees  with  that   of  Luke  xxii.  19, 20. 

Matt..\xvi.  30.  Luke.     After  it  Jesus  sang  a  hymn, 

iL-itt.  xxvi.  36,  and  taking  with  Him  three  of  His 
37.  .    .  ° 

disciples   to  the    Mount   of  Olives, 

He  was  in   an    agony,    His   sweat  Luke  xxii.  42-44. 

falling  in  drops  (not  necessarily  of 

blood)  to  the  ground.     His  captors 

surrounded    Him   like   the   '^ hortted 

bulls"  of  Psalm  xxii.   11-14;  there 

Matt.  x.wi.  56.  was  none  to  help,  for  His  followers 

/o  a  vian  forsook  Him.' 

Matt.  xxvi.  57  ff.       He  was  led  both  before  the  Scribes  Luke  xxii.  66  ff. 
and    Pharisees,    and    before    Pilate. 

Matt,  xxvii.  iiff.  In  the  trial  before   Pilate   He  kept 

•  Professor  Sanday  italicises  this  statement,  as  though  it  was  not  con- 
tained in  the  Gospels ;  but  when  onr  Lord  was  arrested,  Matthew  says, 
"  Then  all  the  disciples  left  Him  and  fled"  (c.ip.  .\.\vi.  56).  Is  not  this  the 
same  lliing  ? 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  195 


Matt,  x.wii.  14.  silence,  as   Psalm   x\ii.   15.      Pilate 

sent  Him  bound  to  Herod.  Luke  xxiii.  7. 

Justin  relates  most  of  the  incidents 
of  the  crucifixion  in  detail,  for  con- 
firmation of  which  he  refers  to  the 
Acts  of  Pilate.  He  marks  especially 
the  fulfilment  in  various  places  of 
Psalm  xxii. 

He  has   the  piercing  with   nails,  Luke  xxiv.  40. 

Matt,  xxvii.  35.  the  casting  of  lots  and  dividing  of  Luke  xxiii.  31. 

Matt.xxvii.39ff.  the    garments,    the    sneers    of    the  Luke  .x.\iii.  35. 

crowd  (somewhat  expanded  from  the 
r^iatt.  x.\vii.  42.  Synoptics),  and  their  taunt,  He  who 
7-aised  the  dead,  let  Him  save  Him- 
Matt.  xxvii.  46.  self;  also  the  cry  of  despair,  "My 
God,  My  God,  why  hast  Thou  for- 
saken   Me?"   and   the    last   words, 
"  Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  commend  Luke  xxiii.  46. 
My  spirit." 
Matt,  xxvii.      The  burial  took  place  in  the  even- 
M^tt.^'xxvi.  iiio)  the  disciples  being  all  scattered 
31-36.       in  accordance  with  Zcchariah  iii.  7. 
Matt,  xxviii.  i  ff.  On  the  third  day,  the  day  of  the  sun,  Luke  xxiv.  21. 
or  the  first  (or   eighth)  day  of  the  Luke  .\.\-iv.  i  ff. 
week,  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead.    He 
then   convinced   His   disciples   that 
His   sufferings   had  been    propheti- 
cally foretold,  and  they  repented  of 
having  deserted  Him.    Having  given 
them  His  last  commission,  they  saw 
Him  ascend  up  into  heaven.     Thus  Luke  xxiv.  50. 
believing,  and  having  first  waited  to 
receive  power  from  Him,  they  went 
forth  into  all  the  world  and  preached 
the   word    of    God.      To    this    day 
Milt,  xxviii.  19.  Christians    baptize    in  the  name   of 
the  Father  of  all,  and  of  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


196  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


Matt,  xxviii.  The  Jews  spread  a  story  that  the 
"''^'  disciples  stole  the  body  of  Jesus 
from  the  grave,  and  so  deceived 
men  by  asserting  that  He  was  not 
risen  from  the  dead  and  ascended 
into  heaven. 

There  is  nothing  in  Justin  (as  in 
Luke  xxiv,  ;  but  of.  Acts  i.  3)  to 
show  that  the  ascension  did  not 
take  place  on  the  same  day  as  the 
resurrection. 

It  was  no  part  of  Justin's  intention  to  give  a 
regular  narrative  of  our  Lord's  life  ;  the  references 
and  allusions  to  it  occur  incidentally  in  the  course 
of  his  two  Apologies y  and  of  his  Dialogue  with  the 
Jew  Trypho  ;  and  yet,  when  these  references  and 
allusions  are  drawn  together,  they  constitute  an 
account  of  our  Lord's  birth  and  the  principal  events 
connected  with  it ;  of  His  baptism  by  John  and  of 
John's  preaching,  imprisonment,  and  death  ;  of  our 
Lord's  temptation,  His  miracles,  His  election  of  the 
apostles,  His  great  discourses,  His  institution  of  the 
supper,  His  agony  in  Gethsemane,  His  crucifixion 
and  resurrection,  such  as  any  of  ourselves  might  write 
with  the  first  three  Gospels  in  our  memory.  The 
story  which  Justin  knew  is  the  story  which  we  know. 

You  will  have  noticed  that  he  has  a  few  state- 
ments concerning  our  Lord  which  are  not  contained 
in  any  of  our  Gospels.^  Of  these,  the  account  of  the 
fire  which  was  kindled  on  the  Jordan  at  our  Lord's 

'  These  arc  italicised  in  the  summary  extracted  from  Pro- 
fessor Sanday. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  197 

baptism,  and  the  words  said  to  have  been  heard  from 
heaven  at  the  baptism,  "  Thou  art  My  Son  ;  this  day 
have  I  begotten  Thee,"  instead  of  "Thou  art  My 
beloved  Son  ;  in  Thee  am  I  well  pleased,"  occur  in 
some  very  ancient  versions  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  and 
represent  early  readings  in  those  two  Gospels.  That 
our  Lord  worked  as  a  carpenter  and  made  ''ploughs 
and yokesl'  may  have  been  a  tradition.  So  may  the 
statement  that  the  wise  men  who  according  to 
Matthew,  "  came  from  the  east,"  cavie  from  Arabia. 
The  statement  that  Herod  ordered  a  massacre  of 
all  the  children  in  Bethlehem  was  probably  nothing 
more  than  a  slip  of  memory.  In  whatever  way  these 
variations  from  the  story  contained  in  our  own 
Gospels  may  be  accounted  for,  it  remains  certain 
that  the  story  contained  in  Justin's  Gospels  was  the 
same  as  that  which  is  contained  in  ours. 

In  Professor  Sanday's  summary  of  Justin's  refer- 
ences and  allusions  to  our  Lord's  history,  there  is  no 
mention  of  any  fact  or  of  any  teaching  that  appears 
in  John's  Gospel  only.  But  I  have  already  given  one 
passage  from  the  First  Apology  which,  in  my  judg- 
ment, must  have  been  drawn  from  John's  account  of 
our  Lord's  conversation  with  Nicodemus  ;  there  are 
other  passages  in  the  First  Apology  and  the  Second, 
and  also  in  the  Dialogue  ivitJi  Trypho,  which  seem  to 
have  been  suggested  by  John's  Gospel,  and  one  very 
striking  passage  which  must  have  been  suggested  by 
John's  First  Epistle.^     As  the  Epistle  seems  to  have 

'  In  the  Z?/a/(7_i,'-w,  cap.  123,  Justin  has,  "Wc    .    .    .    :x.\(t  called 


iqS  JUSTIN  MARTYR. 

been  a  letter  written  to  accompany  the  Gospel,  a 
quotation  from  the  Epistle  is  equal  in  value  to  a 
quotation  from  the  Gospel.  Further,  Justin's  doctrine 
concerning  the  Eternal  Word  is  the  doctrine  which  is 
expounded  in  the  prologue  to  John's  Gospel. 

VI. 

In  Justin's  own  writings  therefore  there  is  decisive 
evidence  that  the  Gospels  which  he  himself  used,  and 
which  were  read  in  the  Christian  assemblies  about 
the  middle  of  the  second  century,  were  the  Gospels 
of  our  own  New  Testament.  But  this  conclusion  is 
supported  by  evidence  drawn  from  other  sources. 
Tatian  was  Justin's  comrade  and  friend;  and  Tatian's 
Diatcssaroji,  as  wc  have  seen,  was  a  "welding  together  " 
of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John.  Is  it  credible 
that  Tatian,  who  shared  with  Justin  the  perils  of 
martyrdom,  dropped  the  Gospels,  which  were  written, 
as  Justin  says,  by  the  apostles  and  the  followers  of  the 
apostles,  and  used  for  his  Diatessaron  another  set  of 
Gospels  of  which  Justin  knew  nothing? 

Further:  it  was  in  A.D.  150  that  these  Gospels  of 
which  Justin  speaks,  and  from  which  he  quotes  so  large 
a  number  of  passages,  were  read  every  Sunday  when 

the  true  children  oj  Cod,  and  we  are."  In  i  John  iii.  i,  John  has, 
"  Behold  what  manner  of  love  the  Father  hath  bestowed  upon 
us,  that  we  should  be  called  children  of  Cod :  and  such  ive  are." 
The  "such"  is  inserted  by  our  Revisers.  The  form  of  John's 
sentence,  we  are  "called  children  of  God  :  and  we  are,"  is  very 
remarkable,  and  it  is  reproduced  in  Justin. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR.  199 

the  Christians  met  for  worship ;  about  thirty-five 
years  later  Irenaeus  constructed  an  elaborate  argu- 
ment to  prove  that  there  must  be  four  Gospels,  and 
only  four.  By  universal  concession  the  Gospels 
which  Irenaeus  used  were  the  same  as  our  own  ;  if 
they  were  not  the  same  as  Justin's,  what  had  become 
of  the  earlier  narratives  —  narratives  written  by 
apostles  and  the  followers  of  apostles  ?  how  did  it 
happen  that  these  ancient  and  more  authentic  nar- 
ratives disappeared  ?  how  did  it  happen  that  they 
were  replaced  by  documents  of  later  origin  and  of 
inferior  authority  ?  how  did  it  happen  that  no 
tradition  or  trace  of  the  abandonment  of  the  earlier 
Gospels  and  the  acceptance  of  the  later,  no  protest 
against  the  change,  can  be  found  in  the  writings  of  the 
men  who  were  living  when  the  change  was  effected  ? 
The  difficulty  of  answering  these  questions  is  enor- 
mously increased  by  the  fact  that  the  old  Gospels  — 
Justin's  Gospels — were  not  mere  private  documents, 
a  few  copies  of  which  were  in  the  possession  of 
Christian  scholars,  but  public  documents,  read  every 
Sunday  in  the  Church  assemblies.  They  were  written 
— so  Justin  believed,  and  so  his  contemporaries  be- 
lieved— by  the  apostles  and  their  followers  ;  how  did 
it  happen  that  the  Churches  consented  to  the  with- 
drawal of  these  authoritative  and  sacred  narratives  of 
our  Lord's  life,  and  to  the  introduction  into  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Church  of  other  narratives,  written  by 
other  hands  ?  Was  there  no  doubt,  no  hesitation, 
about  the  authority  of  the  new  stories  ?     Did  no  great 


JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


and  ancient  Church, proud  of  the  traditions  which  it  had 
inherited  from  its  apostoh'c  founders,  resist  the  inno- 
vation ?  But  if  there  was  any  protest  against  the  new 
Gospels,  any  discussion  of  their  superior  claims  on  the 
affection  and  reverence  of  the  Church,  I  ask  again, 
how  is  it  that  not  the  faintest  trace  of  the  protest 
survived,  and  that  within  forty  years  of  the  time  that 
Justin  wrote  his  First  Apology,  the  new  Gospels  had, 
not  only  secured  universal  acceptance,  as  having  been 
written  by  Matthew  and  John,  Mark  and  Luke,  but 
had  drawn  to  themselves  religious  reverence,  as  narra- 
tives which  were  covered  by  the  authority  of  God  ? 

If  historical  evidence  has  any  conclusive  force,  it 
is  certain  that  Justin's  Gospels  were  the  Gospels  of 
Tatian,  the  Gospels  of  Irena^us,  the  Gospels  of  Ter- 
tullian,  the  Gospels  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  the 
Gospels  in  which  we  ourselves  have  caught  the 
accents  of  a  Divine  voice  and  have  seen  the  light  of 
a  Divine  glory. 


NOTE  TO  LECTURE  ON  JUSTIN. 

In  the  Spectator  for  June  2ist,  1S90,  there  is  a  review  of  an 
American  edition  of  the  works  of  the  late  Mr.  Bngchot.  The 
editor  appears  to  have  given  a  great  deal  of  pains  to  the 
correction  of  Mr.  Bagehot's  misquotations.  Judging  from  the 
spectator  article,  one  begins  to  suspect  that  Mr.  Bagehot's 
exact  quotations  may  be  as  rare  as  Justin's,  and  his  "varia- 
tions," and  even  his  "  decided  variations,"  as  numerous.  But 
Mr.  Bagehot  lived  in  a  literary  age,  and  when  the  literary  con- 
science had  a  code  of  ethics  which  imposed  the  duty  of  quoting 
accurately.     The  Spectator  gives  two  examples. 


JUSTIN  MARTYR. 


DICKENS. 

"  '  It's  always  best  to  do  what  the 
mob  do.'  '  But  suppose  there  are 
two  mobs  ?  ■  suggested  Mr.  Snod- 
grass.  '  Shout  with  the  largest,' 
replied  Mr.  Pickwick. " 

CARLYLE. 

"  Their  Amendment  Act  .  .  . 
was  imperatively  required  to  be  put 
in  practice.  To  create  men  filled 
with  a  theory,  that  refusal  of  out- 
door relief  was  the  one  thing  need- 
ful :  Nature  had  no  readier  way  of 
getting  out-door  relief  refused." 


BAGEHOT'S   QUOTATION. 

"'Always  shout  witli  the  mob,' 
said  Mr.  Pickwick.  '  But  suppose 
there  are  two  mobs  ? '  said  Mr, 
Snodgrass.  '  Tlien  shout  with  the 
loudest,'  said  Mr.  Pickwick." 

BAGEHOT'S    QUOTATION. 

■'It  was  then  above  all  things 
necessary  that  out-door  relief  should 
cease.  But  how  ?  What  means  did 
great  Nature  take  for  accomplishing 
that  desirable  end?  She  created  a 
race  of  men  who  believed  the  cessa- 
tion of  out-door  relief  to  be  the  one 
thing  needful." 


Did  Mr.  Bagehot  use  what  the  critics  would  call  "  the 
original  Dickens,"  which  has  mysteriously  disappeared,  and 
"  the  original  Carlyle,"  which,  strange  to  say,  has  had  a  similar 
fate  ?  Are  we  to  infer  that  our  Pickwick  probably  attributes  to 
Sam  Weller  a  score  of  witticisms  which  Mr.  Bagehot's /"/(T/i'TwV/t 
did  not  contain ;  and  that  probably  the  "  chops  and  tomato " 
letter,  and  the  famous  trial  of  Bardell  v.  Pickwick,  is  a  later 
growth .''  Are  we  also  to  infer  that  it  is  risky  to  attribute  any 
siartling  passages  in  our  Chartism  to  the  real  sage  of  Chelsea  ? 


LECTURE    XI. 

MARCION. 


Justin  Martyr,  in  his  First  Apology,  written  about 
A.D.  150,  speaks  of  Marcion  as  "a  man  of  Pontus, 
who  is  even  at  this  day  ahve  and  teaching  his 
disciples  to  beheve  in  some  other  God  greater  than 
the  Creator."  He  had  a  large  number  of  followers. 
Justin  says  :  "  He  has  caused  many  of  every  nation 
to  speak  blasphemies."  He  travelled  over  many 
countries,  and  at  the  end  of  the  second  century  his 
heresy  was  formidable  and  widely  spread.  At  the 
end  of  the  fourth  century  it  still  survived  in  Italy, 
Egypt,  Palestine,  Arabia,  Syria,  Cyprus,  and  Persia. 

Marcion  lived  a  blameless,  honourable,  and  austere 
life  ;  and  the  Marcionites  maintained  the  rigid 
morality  of  the  founder  of  their  sect.  They  practised 
a  severe  asceticism,  abstaining  from  wine,  from  meat, 
and  from  marriage.  They  were  of  the  same  mind  as 
Tertullian  as  to  the  crime  of  concealing  their  faith 
in  order  to  escape  persecution,  and  many  of  them 
suffered  martyrdom  for  the  name  of  Christ. 

Their  fundamental   doctrine  has  an  interest  for  us 


MARCION.  203 


even  in  these  times.  To  Marcion  there  were  two 
Gods.  He  found  an  irreconcilable  contrast  between 
the  God  revealed  in  the  Old  Testament  and  the  God 
revealed  in  Christ.  The  God  of  the  Old  Testament 
was  a  just,  but  a  relentless  God.  The  law  which  He 
gave  to  men  was  equitable,  but  stern  ;  it  represents 
His  own  character  and  the  principles  on  which  He 
governed  mankind  :  "  An  eye  for  an  eye,  and  a  tooth 
for  a  tooth."  The  law  of  the  God  whom  Christ  has 
revealed  is  more  gracious  and  more  noble  :  "  Whoso- 
ever smiteth  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the 
other  also";  and  His  law  is  the  expression  of  His 
own  merciful  character  and  government. 

The  material  universe  and  the  human  race  were 
created,  according  to  Marcion,  by  the  God  who  was 
worshipped  by  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  whose 
presence  was  revealed  to  their  terrified  descendants  at 
Sinai  by  the  storm-clouds,  the  lightnings,  the  thunders, 
the  awful  fire,  the  smoke  which  "  ascended  as  the 
smoke  of  a  furnace,"  and  the  agitation  of  the  granite 
mountain,  which  trembled  because  He  was  near.  He 
was  the  God  whose  prophets  menaced  the  Jewish 
people  with  terrible  punishments  for  their  crimes,  and 
who,  when  His  patience  was  exhausted,  swept  them 
into  exile  and  laid  their  country  in  ruins.  He  was  a 
just  God,  but  not  good  and  gracious. 

The  miseries  which  were  being  inflicted  on  men 
in  this  life  for  their  sins,  the  worse  miseries  to 
which  they  were  destined  in  the  life  to  come,  touched 
the  mercy  of  the  Supreme.    They  were  suffering  justly, 


204  MARC  I  ON. 


but  He  pitied  them.  For  thousands  of  years  He 
had  left  the  world  and  mankind  in  the  hands  of  their 
Creator.  He  had  concerned  Himself  about  neither. 
But  at  last  His  heart  was  moved,  and  He  sent  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  redeem  the  human  race  from  the 
power  of  this  just  but  merciless  Deity.  Our  Lord,  on 
this  hypothesis,  was  not  the  Messiah  of  Jewish  pro- 
phecy, but  a  Messiah  of  quite  another  kind  ;  He  came 
for  a  wholly  different  work.  He  was  not  sent  by  the 
Creator  of  the  world  to  give  great  secular  splendour 
to  His  elect  nation,  but  by  the  Supreme  God,  to 
deliver  the  human  race  from  the  evils  which  their 
Creator  was  righteously  inflicting  on  them.  The 
original  apostles  had  therefore,  according  to  Marcion, 
misapprehended  the  true  nature  of  our  Lord's  mission. 
Never  was  a  great  teacher  more  flagrantly  unsuccess- 
ful in  making  his  mind  clear  to  his  disciples.  The 
men  who  had  lived  with  our  Lord  in  the  closest 
intimacy  during  His  earthly  ministry  believed  that 
He  acknowledged  the  authority  of  their  ancient 
Scriptures  ;  that  He  had  come  to  fulfil  the  law  and 
the  prophets  ;  that  He  was  revealing  more  fully  the 
God  of  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob  ;  that  He  was 
the  Christ  for  whose  coming  the  Jewish  race  had  been 
waiting  and  longing  through  many  centuries  of  glory 
and  of  shame.  This  was  their  belief  while  He  was 
with  them  ;  and  for  this  belief  they  perilled  their  liv^es 
after  He  had  returned  to  the  Father.  But,  according 
to  Marcion,  their  belief  was  wholly  false.  He  there- 
fore rejected  the  authority  of  the  original  apostles 


MARCION.  205 


and  of  their  followers.  For  him  neither  their 
Epistles  nor  their  Gospels  had  any  worth.  They  had 
continued  to  worship  the  God  of  the  Jews  as  the 
Supreme  God  ;  they  supposed  that  Jesus  was  the 
Jewish  Messiah  ;  to  the  last  they  were  Jews  rather 
than  Christians. 

But  the  Jews — and  even  many  Christian  Jews — 
had  hated  Paul  as  the  enemy  of  their  faith  and  their 
nation,  and  as  a  traitor  to  their  sacred  traditions, 
their  inalienable  prerogatives,  and  their  immeasur- 
able hopes.  There  was  incontestable  evidence  that 
between  Paul  and  Peter  there  had  been  grave  differ- 
ences of  judgment  as  to  the  observance  of  certain 
Jewish  customs.  For  Marcion,  therefore,  Paul  was 
the  true  representative  of  the  mind  of  Christ ;  Paul 
had  discovered  what  the  original  apostles  had  missed 
—  the  irreconcilable  antagonism  between  the  old 
Faith  and  the  new.  His  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment was  constructed  on  these  principles.  It  con- 
sisted of  two  parts — "  The  Gospel "  and  "  The 
Apostolicon."  In  the  "  Apostolicon  "  he  placed  ten 
of  Paul's  Epistles,  rejecting  the  Epistles  to  Timothy 
and  Titus  ;  ^  his  "  Gospel  "  was  the  Gospel  of  Luke. 

But  even  Paul's  Epistles  were  hard  to  reconcile  with 
the  doctrine  of  Marcion  concerning  the  God  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  he  therefore  mutilated  them. 
He  cut  out,  for  example,  the  following  passages  from 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians :  "  Know  therefore  that 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  he,  of  course,  rejected. 


2o6  MARCION. 


they  which  be  of  faith,  the  same  are  the  sons  of 
Abraham "  (cap.  iii.  7) ;  "  That  upon  the  Gentiles 
might  come  the  blessing  of  Abraham  in  Christ  Jesus" 
(cap.  iii.  14) ;  "  Now  to  Abraham  were  the  promises 
spoken,  and  to  his  seed.  He  saith  not,  And  to  seeds, 
as  of  many  ;  but  as  of  one,  And  to  thy  seed,  which 
is  Christ.  Now  this  I  say :  A  covenant  confirmed 
beforehand  by  God,  the  law,  which  came  four  hundred 
and  thirty  years  after,  doth  not  disannul,  so  as  to 
make  the  promise  of  none  effect.  For  if  the  inheri- 
tance is  of  the  law,  it  is  no  more  of  promise :  but  God 
hath  granted  it  to  Abraham  by  promise "  (cap.  iii. 
16-18).  But  no  mutilations — had  they  been  still  more 
audacious  than  those  on  which  Marcion  ventured 
— could  remove  from  Paul's  Epistles  the  reverence 
with  which  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  regarded 
the  ancient  revelation  of  God  to  the  Jews  ;  and  the 
orthodox  assailants  of  Marcion  had  no  difficulty  in 
showing  that  even  the  mutilated  Epistles  were  de- 
structive of  the  Marcion ite  heresy. 

It  was  also  necessary  to  mutilate  the  Gospel  of 
Luke.  According  to  Marcion,  Christ  w^as  not  born 
of  a  woman,  with  a  body  of  flesh  and  blood  like  our 
own  ;  for  it  was  impossible  that  in  Him  there  should 
be  anything  that  was  derived  from  what  had  been 
brought  into  existence  by  the  Creator  of  the  world 
and  of  mankind.  His  Gospel  therefore  began  with 
the  beginning  of  our  Lord's  public  ministry  :  "  In  the 
fifteenth  )'ear  of  Tiberius,  God  came  down  to  Caper- 
naum, a  city  of  Galilee,  and  taught  on  the  Sabbath 


MARC  ION.  207 


day."  The  early  chapters  of  Luke,  which  contain 
the  account  of  our  Lord's  birth,  His  genealogy,  His 
baptism,  and  His  temptation,  were  omitted.  There 
were  also  considerable  omissions,  which  are  not 
explicable,  from  later  chapters  in  the  Gospel. 

The  original  text  of  Marcion's  Gospel  has  been 
lost,  but  it  has  been  reconstructed  from  Tertullian 
and  Epiphanius,  both  of  whom  wrote  against  Mar- 
cionism.  The  assailants  of  Marcion  contended  that 
in  the  mutilated  Gospel  of  Luke,  as  in  the  mutilated 
Epistles  of  Paul,  enough  was  left  to  destroy  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  Marcionism.  They  therefore 
had  to  quote  and  discuss  Marcioii's  Gospel  at  great 
length  ;  and  from  these  quotations  and  discussions  we 
can  discover  what  it  preserved  of  Luke's  Gospel  and 
what  it  rejected. 

H. 

There  are  two  questions  to  be  determined  before 
we  can  draw  any  conclusion  from  Marcion's  Gospel 
in  support  of  the  early  origin  of  the  Gospel  of 
Luke:  (i)  Is  it  not  possible  that  the  two  Gospels 
are  two  independent  narratives,  and  may  not  the 
coincidences  between  them  be  explained  by  sup- 
posing that  the  two  writers  drew  their  story  of  our 
Lord's  life  and  teaching  from  the  same  sources.  Or, 
(2)  If  they  are  not  independent  narratives,  is  it  not 
possible  that  Marcion's  Gospel,  instead  of  being  a 
mutilated  form  of  a  more  trustworthy  narrative,  is 
really  the  older  document?     In  that  case  we  should 


2o8  MARC  ION. 


have  to  speak,  not  of  the  "omissions"  of  Marcion 
but  of  the  "  additions  "  of  our  present  Luke. 

First,  then,  were  the  two  Gospels  independent 
works  ?     This  is  not  possible. 

(i)  Marcion  contains  practically  nothing  that  is 
not  contained  in  Luke.  "  The  additions  are  insigni- 
ficant— some  thirty  words  in  all — and  those,  for  the 
most  part,  supported  by  other  authority."  With  the 
exception  of  these  thirty  words  and  some  slight 
alterations  of  phrase  Marcion's  Gospel  is  simply  "  an 
abridgment  of  our  St.  Luke."  ^ 

(2)  The  order  of  Luke's  narrative  is  very  different 
from  the  order  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  Marcion's 
order  follows  Luke's. 

"  There  is  some  disturbance  and  re-arrangement  in 
the  first  chapter  of  Marcion's  Gospel,  though  the 
substance  is  that  of  the  third  Synoptic  ;  but  from  this 
point  onwards  the  two  move  step  by  step  together, 
but  for  the  omissions  and  a  single  transposition 
(iv.  27  to  xvii.  18)." 

Out  of  fifty-three  sections  peculiar  to  St.  Luke — 
from  iv.  16  onwards — all  but  eight  are  found  also  in 
Marcion's  Gospel.  They  are  found,  too,  in  precisely 
the  same  order.  Curious  and  intricate  as  is  the 
mosaic  work  of  the  third  Gospel,  all  the  intricacies 
of  its  pattern  are  reproduced  in  the  Gospel  of  Mar- 

'  Professor  Sanday  :  TJte  Gospels  in  the  Second  Century, 
p.  214.  The  chapter  on  Marcioa  is  perhaps  the  most  interest- 
ing and  valuable  in  his  interesting  and  valuable  book.  I  have 
used  it  very  largely  in  this  Lecture. 


MARCION.  209 


cion.  Where  Luke  makes  an  insertion  in  the  ground- 
stock  of  his  narrative,  there  Marcion  makes  an  inser- 
tion also  ;  where  Luke  omits  part  of  the  narrative, 
Marcion  does  the  same. 

In  the  very  heart  of  Luke's  Gospel  (ix.  51  to  xviii. 
14)  discourses  of  Christ  are  inserted  without  regard 
to  chronological  order.  "  This  peculiarity  is  faithfully 
reproduced  in  the  Gospel  of  Marcion  with  the  same 
disregard  of  chronology,  the  only  change  being  the 
omission  of  about  forty-one  verses  from  a  total  of 
380." 

(3)  There  are  names  mentioned  by  Luke  which  do 
not  appear  in  any  of  the  other  Gospels, — Joanna, 
Susanna,  Cleopas,  and  Zaccheus  ;  "  not  only  does 
each  of  the  sections  relating  to  these  persons  re- 
appear in  Marcion's  Gospel,  but  it  re-appears  pre- 
cisely at  the  same  place." 

(4)  A  careful  examination  of  the  first  three  Gospels 
shows  that  the  three  Evangelists  do  not  always  agree 
in  their  account  of  the  particular  occasions  and 
circumstances  of  some  of  our  Lord's  sayings  and 
actions.  For  example,  the  words  of  our  Lord,  "  Ye 
know  that  the  rulers  of  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over  them, 
and  their  great  ones  exercise  authority  over  them. 
Not  so  shall  it  be  among  you  :  but  whosoever  would 
become  great  among  you  shall  be  your  minister  ;  and 
whosoever  would  be  first  among  you  shall  be  your 
servant," — these  words  were  spoken,  according  to 
Matthew  and  Mark  at  or  near  Jericho,  when  our 
Lord  was  on  His  way  to  Jerusalem  to  die  ;  and  they 

L.  C.  14 


MARC  I  ON. 


were  spoken  to  rebuke  and  quiet  the  indignation  with 
which  the  other  apostles  heard  that  James  and  John, 
or  their  mother  on  their  behalf,  had  asked  Christ  to 
promise  them  the  thrones  on  His  right  hand  and  His 
left  in  His  kingdom.  Luke  gives  the  impression  that 
they  were  spoken  during  the  Last  Supper.  There 
are  other  similar  differences  between  the  Evangelists, 
some  of  which  those  who  have  constructed  "  Har- 
monies of  the  Four  Gospels  "  have  found  it  difficult 
to  adjust.  Now  it  is  remarkable  that  "  where  Luke 
has  the  other  two  Synoptics  against  him  .  .  . 
Marcion  has  them  against  him  too." 

(5)  Further,  where  Luke  breaks  off  from  Matthew 
and  Mark,  and  leaves  a  gap  in  the  story,  Marcion 
leaves  the  same  gap. 

(6)  "  It  has  been  noticed  as  characteristic  of  St. 
Luke,  that  where  he  has  recorded  a  similar  incident 
before,  he  omits  what  might  seem  to  be  a  repetition 
of  it.  This  characteristic  is  exactly  reflected  in  ]\Iar- 
cion,  and  that  in  regard  to  the  very  same  incidents." 

(7)  "  Then,  wherever  the  patristic  statements  give 
us  the  opportunity  of  comparing  Marcion's  text  with 
the  Synoptic,  and  this  they  do  very  largely  indeed, 
the  two  are  found  to  coincide  with  no  greater  varieties 
than  would  be  found  between  any  two  not  directly 
related  manuscripts  of  the  same  text." 

The  conclusion  is  irresistible.  We  must  choose 
between  the  two  alternatives.  "  Either  Marcion's 
Gospel  is  an  abridgment  of  our  present  St.  Luke,  or 
else  our  present  St.  Luke  is  nn  expansion  by  inter- 


MARCION. 


polation  of  Marcion's  Gospel,  or  of  a  document  co- 
extensive with  it.  No  third  hypothesis  is  tenable." 
The  two  Gospels  cannot  be  independent  works.^ 

But,  secondly,  if  the  two  Gospels  are  not  indepen- 
dent of  each  other,  may  not  Marcion's  represent  the 
original  document  ?  In  that  case  the  passages  con- 
tained in  our  Luke  are  additions  by  a  later  hand. 
The  evidence  against  this  hypothesis  is  conclusive. 

1.  We  know  that  Marcion  mutilated  Paul's 
Epistles  ;  he  would  hardly  hesitate  to  mutilate 
Luke's  Gospel.  The  passages  which  he  omitted  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  are  inconsistent  with  the 
theory  that  the  Creator  of  the  world,  the  God  of 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  the  God  of  Jewish 
psalmists  and  prophets,  was  the  God  who  sent  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  save  mankind.  The  early 
chapters  of  Luke  are  equally  inconsistent  with  this 
theory.  The  reasons  which  led  him  to  mutilate  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  would  lead  him  to  mutilate 
the  Gospel. 

2.  There  arc  indications  of  a  very  striking  and 
decisive  character  that  the  passages  which   Marcion 


'  The  quotations  in  tlic  prcccdintj  pai"ai,MapIis  are  from  Pro- 
fessor Sanday's  T/ie  Gospels  in  the  Scsond  Ccittuiy,  pp.  214-216. 
The  sentences  not  marked  as  quotations  contain  either  sum- 
maries of  Professor  Sanday's  statements  or  explanatory  matter 
introduced  for  the  sake  of  readers  who  are  not  conversant  with 
inquiries  of  this  description.  I  have  inserted  the  figures  (i),  (2), 
etc.,  to  make  the  separate  arguments  more  distinct. 


212  MARCION. 


omits  must  have  come  from  the  same  hand  as  the 
main  body  of  the  Gospel  which  he  preserves.  Luke 
has  a  style  of  his  own.  There  are  words  that  occur 
with  great  frequency  in  the  third  Gospel,  which 
occur  very  rarely,  or  not  at  all,  in  the  other  books 
of  the  New  Testament.  The  writer  has  his  peculiar 
phrases,  and  he  has  his  peculiar  forms  of  construction. 
He  has  peculiarities  in  his  use  of  adverbs,  of  pre- 
positions, of  pronouns,  and  in  the  combination  of 
participles.  These  characteristics  of  his  style  are, 
for  the  most  part,  not  so  obvious  as  to  strike  ordinary 
readers  :  to  detect  them  requires  exact  and  laborious 
examination.  But  the  style  of  the  passages  omitted 
by  Marcion  is  identical  with  the  style  of  the  rest  of 
the  Gospel  and  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  Luke's 
Gospel  contains  309  verses  which  are  absent  from 
Marcion's :  "In  those  verses  there  are  found  in 
distinct  peculiarities  of  St.  Luke's  style,  numbering  in 
all  185  separate  instances;  there  are  also  found  138 
words  peculiar  to  or  .specially  characteristic  of  the 
third  Evangelist  with  224  instances.  In  other  words, 
the  verified  peculiarities  of  St.  Luke's  style  and  dic- 
tion .  .  .  are  found  in  the  portions  of  the  Gospel 
omitted  by  Marcion  in  a  proportion  averaging  con- 
siderably more  than  one  to  each  verse."  ^ 

It  would  not  be  difficult  for  a  man  of  literary  skill 
to  write  passages  which  might  pass  for  Dr.  Johnson's  ; 

'  Professor  Sand.w  :   The  Gospels  in  the  Second  Century, 
p.  229. 


MARCION.  213 


it  would  be  less  easy  to  produce  half  a  dozen  para- 
graphs that  could  be  mistaken  for  Gibbon's  ;  and  still 
less  easy  to  achieve  an  ease,  transparency,  and  grace 
that  might  be  mistaken  for  Mr.  Froude's  ;  but  for  one 
author  to  write  passages  in  imitation  of  another,  which 
would  stand  the  tests  of  concordance  and  grammar 
that  have  been  applied  to  the  "  omitted  "  passages  of 
Luke,  would  require — if  possible  at  all — an  artist  of 
almost  miraculous  skill.  There  are  no  grounds  for 
supposing  that  any  Christian  scholars  in  the  middle 
of  the  second  century  subjected  the  st}'le  of  Luke 
or  of  any  other  New  Testament  writer  to  the  kind 
of  scrutiny  to  which  it  has  been  subjected  by  the 
modern  scholars  of  Germany  and  England  ;  and  in 
the  absence  of  the  results  which  such  a  study  yields, 
no  imitator  could  have  reproduced  the  peculiarities 
of  Luke  as  they  appear  in  those  passages  of  our  third 
Gospel  which  are  absent  from  the  Gospel  of  Marcion. 
Which  then  is  the  more  probable  alternative?  Did 
some  unknown  writer  in  the  second  century  work  a 
literary  miracle  ?  Or  did  Marcion,  who  mutilated  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  mutilate  the  Gospel  of  Luke  ?  Hesi- 
tation is  impossible.  The  Gospel  of  Luke  is  the 
original  document ;  Marcion's  is  a  mutilated  abridg- 
ment. 

III. 
In  A.D.  1 50,  according  to  Justin,  Marcion  had  dis- 
ciples in  many  countries.     He  must,  therefore,  have 
been  teaching  for  many  years.     There  is  a  general 


214  MARCION. 


agreement  that  he  was  teaching  his  heresies  in  Rome 
about  A.D.  139-142.  Very  early  in  his  assault  on 
the  traditional  faith  of  the  Church  he  must  have 
found  it  necessary  to  give  his  disciples  a  life  of  our 
Lord.  His  Gospel  was  probably  published  as  early 
as  A.D.  140,  perhaps  earlier  ;  and  as  Marcion's  Gospel 
was  a  mutilated  abridgment  of  Luke's,  the  date  of 
Luke's  must  have  been  earlier  still. 

But  how  much  earlier  ?  Professor  Sanday  has 
given  a  very  striking  answer  to  this  question.  Be- 
fore the  invention  of  printing,  books  had  to  be  copied 
by  hand.  If  the  first  copyist  of  the  original  manu- 
script made  a  few  mistakes,  these  mistakes  would 
probably  be  reproduced  with  errors  of  their  own  by 
the  writers  who  copied  from  him.  The  second  man 
who  copied  the  original  manuscript  would  probably 
make  another  set  of  mistakes,  and  these  also  would 
be  reproduced,  with  errors  of  their  own,  by  the  writers 
who  copied  from  him.  And  the  same  thing  would 
happen  in  the  case  of  the  third,  the  fourth,  and  every 
later  copyist  of  the  original.  It  is  the  business  of 
those  who  study  what  is  called  the  criticism  of  the 
New  Testament  texts  to  examine  and  compare  the 
various  readings  of  different  ancient  manuscripts. 
They  also  examine  and  compare  the  various  read- 
ings found  in  the  quotations  from  the  New  Testament 
which  occur  in  ancient  Christian  writers,  and  from 
these  they  are  able  to  discover  the  readings  of  the 
manuscripts  which  were  used  by  these  writers.  As 
the  result   of  this   examination,  they  can   ascertain, 


MARC  ION. 


sometimes  with  practical  certaint}%  sometimes  with 
a  high  degree  of  probability,  what  manuscripts  and 
what  readings  have  a  claim  to  be  regarded  as  the 
more  ancient.  They  can  trace,  so  to  speak,  the  pedi- 
gree and  history  of  the  various  readings. 

Now  Professor  Sanday,  who  is  an  authority  in  this 
curious  province  of  learning,  says  :  "  If  Marcion's 
Gospel  was  an  extract  from  a  manuscript  containing 
our  present  St.  Luke,  then  not  only  is  it  certain  that 
that  Gospel  was .  already  in  existence,  but  there  is 
further  e\idence  to  show  that  it  must  have  been  in 
existence  for  some  time."  ^ 

"  In  the  year  140  A.D.  Marcion  possesses  a  Gospel 
which  is  already  in  an  advanced  stage  of  transcription 
— which  has  not  only  undergone  those  changes  which 
in  some  regions  the  text  underwent  before  it  was 
translated  into  Latin,  but  has  undergone  other 
changes  besides "  ;  ^  that  is,  our  Gospel  of  Luke 
must  have  passed  through  the  hands  of  a  succession 
of  copyists  before  the  text  came  into  the  condition  in 
which  Marcion  used  it.  There  is  no  direct  evidence, 
says  Professor  Sanday,  of  the  antiquity  of  the  earth  ; 
but  the  geologist  judges  by  the  fossils — the  relics  of 
an  extinct  age — vvhich  he  finds  imbedded  in  the  strata ; 
so  here,  in  the  Gospel  of  Marcion,  do  we  find  relics 
which  to  the  initiated  eye  carry  with  them  their  own 
story.^  Marcion's  Gospel  was  derived  from  Luke's ; 
but   the  text  of  Luke  which  Marcion  used — this  fs 

'  Pages  230,  231.  =  Page  23S.  M\igc  236. 


2i6  MARC  ION. 


Professor  Sanday's  argument — must  have  had  "  a 
long  previous  history,  and  the  manuscripts  through 
which  it  was  conveyed  must  have  parted  far  from  the 
parent  stem."  ^  Luke,  therefore,  must  have  been 
originally  written  a  long  time  before  A.D.  140. 

Only  scholars  who  have  studied  the  criticism  of 
ancient  texts  can  form  an  independent  judgment  of  the 
validity  of  this  kind  of  evidence  ;  and  only  geologists 
can  form  an  independent  judgment  on  the  geological 
evidence  for  the  antiquity  of  the  earth.  Most  of  us 
have  to  accept  the  fact  of  the  earth's  antiquity  on  the 
authority  of  geologists  ;  and  this  particular  argument 
for  the  antiquity  of  Luke's  Gospel  must  rest,  for  most 
of  us,  on  the  authority  of  critical  scholars.  Professor 
Sanday's  authority  has  great  weight. 

IV. 

Marcion's  Gospel  omits,  as  I  have  already  said, 
the  early  chapters  of  Luke's  Gospel.  Perhaps  to 
some  of  you  it  may  appear  that  these  chapters,  with 
their  story  of  angelic  appearances  and  of  prophecies 
uttered  by  Zacharias,  the  father  of  John  the  Baptist, 
by  Mary  the  mother  of  our  Lord,  and  by  the  aged 
Simeon,  give  a  mythical  character  to  all  that  part 
of  the  narrative.  You  may  feel  half  inclined  to 
believe  that  though  the  rest  of  the  Gospel  may  con- 
tain an  early  and  authentic  account  of  our  Lord's 
history  and    teaching,  these  chapters   must  preserve 

^  Page  236. 


MARCION.  217 


the  popular  legends  of  a  later  generation,  or  must 
have  been  the  deliberate  invention  of  a  later  writer. 

But  examine  their  contents,  and  ask  whether  it  is 
conceivable  that  they  were  invented  by  a  Christian 
writer  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  or  even  in 
the  earliest  years  of  the  second  century  ;  and  ask, 
too,  whether  it  is  conceivable  that  popular  Christian 
legends  could  have  taken  this  form  ? 

What  strikes  me  in  these  chapters  is  that  they 
show  no  trace  of  those  great  discoveries  concerning 
the  true  glory  of  Christ  which  came  to  the  Church 
after  our  Lord's  return  to  the  Father.  In  the  words 
of  the  angel  to  Zacharias  about  the  mission  of  the 
son  that  was  to  be  born  to  him  in  his  old  age,  and 
who  was  to  go  before  the  face  of  God  and  "  make 
ready  for  the  Lord  a  people  prepared  for  Him,"  there 
is  nothing  that  passes  beyond  the  old  horizons  of 
Jewish  hope  and  prophecy.  There  are  the  same  limi- 
tations in  the  words  of  the  angcl  to  Mary  about  the 
destiny  of  the  child  who  was  to  be  at  once  her  own 
Son  and  the  Son  of  God.  Nor  in  the  song  of  Mary 
herself,  in  answer  to  the  congratulations  of  Elizabeth, 
is  there  any  premonition  of  the  revelations  of  the 
glory  of  Christ  which  appear  in  the  apostolic  epistles. 
Zacharias  "  was  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  pro- 
phesied "  :  but  his  prophecy  is  the  prophecy  of  a  de- 
vout Jew,  who  saw,  in  the  approaching  advent  of  the 
Messiah,  the  fulfilment  of  the  oath  of  God  to  Abraham, 
the  restoration  of  the  throne  of  David,  the  deliverance 
of  the  Jewish  race  from  their  enemies  and  from  the 


21 8  MARCION. 


hand  of  all  that  hated  them.  Witli  these  external 
and  national  deliverances  there  was  to  be  a  great 
ethical  and  religious  reformation  ;  but  the  whole  of 
the  prophecy,  in  its  substance  as  well  as  in  its  form, 
is  Jewish.  Even  Simeon's  thanksgiving,  in  which 
Christ  is  described  as  "a  light  for  revelation  to  the 
Gentiles"  as  well  as  "the  glory"  of  God's  people 
Israel,  is  also  Jewish  ;  it  is  the  echo  of  some  of  the 
noblest  of  ancient  Jewish  prophecies ;  it  shows  no 
trace  of  the  influence  of  the  new  spirit  and  the  new 
modes  of  thought  which  were  created  by  the  Chris- 
tian Gospel. 

On  the  hypothesis  that  Marcion's  Gospel  represents 
the  original  document,  these  chapters  were  a  later 
insertion.  We  are  required  to  suppose  that  some 
Christian  writer  in  the  second  century  composed 
these  psalms  and  prophecies  and  angelic  communi- 
cations concerning  the  birth  of  Christ,  and  that  he 
excluded  from  them  every  characteristic  Christian 
element,  everything  that  could  distinguish  them  from 
the  visions  of  the  greatness  of  the  Messiah  which 
came  to  ancient  Jewish  prophets  many  centuries 
before.  Is  that  conceivable?  Would  it  have  occurred 
to  a  Christian  writer  to  practise  that  exclusion  ? 
Would  it  not  have  been  natural  for  him  to  assume 
that,  when  an  angel  came  to  announce  to  Zacharias 
the  birth  of  the  forerunner  of  the  Messiah,  and  to 
Mary  the  birth  of  the  Messiah  Himself,  the  angelic 
message  would  be  penetrated  with  at  least  some 
rays   of  that   splendour  which  did   not  break   upon 


MAKCION.  219 


the  common  world  till  after  our  Lord's  resurrection 
and  ascension  ?  Would  it  not  have  been  natural  for 
him  to  assume  that  Zacharias,  Simeon,  and  Mary, 
the  mother  of  our  Lord,  when  they  were  filled  with 
the  Holy  Ghost,  must  have  had  clearer  visions  of 
the  true  glory  of  Christ  than  had  come  to  the  ancient 
prophets  of  Judaism  ? 

There  would  have  been  nothing  to  invalidate  the 
authenticity  of  the  narrative  if  the  messages  at- 
tributed to  the  angel,  and  in  the  prophecies  and 
psalms  attributed  to  Zacharias,  Simeon,  and  Mar}', 
there  had  been  these  large  anticipations  of  the  new 
Christian  conception  of  the  Divine  redemption  and 
the  Divine  kingdom.  The  absence  of  these  anticipa- 
tions is  a  strong,  and  to  some  minds  will  be  a  de- 
cisive, proof  of  the  historic  truth  of  the  story.  That 
it  was  necessary  to  exclude  them  would  never  have 
occurred  to  a  Christian  writer  who  was  imagining 
what  might  have  been  said  about  the  advent  of  Christ 
by  an  angel  and  by  devout  persons  speaking  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  If  he  had  tried 
to  exclude  them,  he  could  hardly  have  done  it.  It 
is  still  less  conceivable  that  these  anticipations  of 
maturer  Christian  knowledge  could  have  been  ex- 
cluded from  legends  which  had  been  created  by  the 
devout  imagination  of  the  commonalty  of  the 
Church. 

The  angelic  messages,  the  psalms,  the  prophecies 
which  are  preserved  in  the  two  first  chapters  of  Luke, 
ffive  strong  internal    confirmation    to   the    historical 


MARCION. 


trustworthiness  of  this  part  of  the  narrative.  The 
new  revelation  had  not  been  made  when  Christ  was 
born  ;  and  neither  the  messages  of  the  angel  Gabriel 
nor  the  prophecies  and  psalms  of  devout  persons 
under  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  anticipate 
it.  The  profound  consistency  between  all  that  is  con- 
tained in  these  two  chapters  and  the  actual  stage  of 
the  development  of  Divine  revelation  at  the  time  to 
which  they  refer,  is  beyond  the  reach  of  both  acci- 
dent and  art.  Its  only  explanation  is  the  simplest 
one  :  the  writer  had  learnt  what  was  actually  said 
by  the  persons  whose  words  he  professes  to  record.^ 

^  The  argument  in  the  text  for  the  genuineness  of  the  first 
two  chapters  is  sustained  by  the  evidence  from  style.  "  In  the 
principal  omission — that  of  the  first  two  chapters,  containing 
132  verses  —  there  are  47  distinct  peculiarities  of  style  \i.e. 
peculiarities  characteristic  of  the  Gospel  generally]  with  105 
instances ;  and  82  characteristic  words  with  144  instances." 
— S.-\XD.\v  :  The  Gospels  in  the  Second  Ccntioy,  p.  229. 


LECTURE   XII. 
PAPIAS. 

THIS  evening  I  shall  speak  to  you  of  a  man  who 
knew  some,  perhaps  many,  of  the  friends  of  the 
apostles,  and  who  knew  two  of  the  original  disciples 
of  our  Lord.  That  the  apostles  had  friends  whose 
names  are  not  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament, 
friends  whom  they  loved,  and  who  loved  them,  has 
perhaps  never  occurred  to  some  of  us.  And  we  may 
not  find  it  easy  to  give  a  place  in  our  imagination 
to  the  forgotten  men  and  women  with  whom  Peter, 
James  and  John,  Andrew,  Philip,  Matthew,  and  the 
rest  used  to  dine  ;  in  whose  houses  they  were  guests 
for  days  and  weeks  together  ;  whose  children  they 
nursed  and  prayed  for  ;  whose  misfortunes,  illnesses, 
bereavements  filled  them  with  anxiety  and  sorrow, 
and  in  whose  health  and  happiness  they  rejoiced  ;  to 
whom  they  used  to  give  accounts  of  the  discourses 
of  our  Lord  and  of  Mis  miracles  ;  and  of  Mary  His 
mother,  and  of  Lazaiais  and  Martha  and  INIar)-  of 
Bethany  ;  of  the  desolation  and  terror  of  the  night  in 
which  He  was  betrayed  ;  the  awful  darkness  which 
fell  on  the  world  while  He  was  hanging  on  the  cross  ; 


222  PAPJAS. 

the  wonder  and  the  doubt  with  which  they  heard  in 
the  early  morning  the  first  news  of  His  resurrection, 
and  their  perfect  blessedness  when  He  appeared  to 
them  in  the  evening. 

Not  very  many  years  ago  there  were  people  to 
whom  it  was  wonderful  that  any  one  they  knew 
should  leave  England,  and,  after  a  few  months' 
absence,  should  return  and  tell  them  what  he  had 
seen  in  the  Holy  Land.  It  seemed  very  strange  that 
a  man  living  in  the  next  house  had  walked  in  the 
streets  of  Jerusalem,  had  stood  on  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  had  seen  Bethany  and  Bethlehem,  had  sat 
by  Jacob's  well,  had  been  in  a  boat  on  the  Lake  of 
Gennesareth.  It  gave  them  a  shock.  For  Jerusalem, 
the  Mount  of  Olives,  Bethany,  Bethlehem,  Jacob's 
well,  and  the  Lake  of  Gennesareth  seemed  to  belong 
to  another  world  than  that  which  is  visited  by  the 
light  of  the  common  day.  They  were  visited  in 
hours  of  devout  thought.  They  were  separated  by  a 
great  mystery  from  the  ordinary  paths  of  men.  A 
glory  transfigured  them.  It  was  not  possible  to  think 
of  them  as  wc  think  of  Geneva  and  Mont  Blanc  and 
the  Lake  of  Lucerne.  With  some  perhaps  this  feel- 
ing still  lingers. 

In  the  same  way,  the  apostles  seem  to  some  of  us 
to  have  no  other  place  than  in  the  New  Testament. 
They  lived  with  Christ  during  His  earthly  ministry. 
They  knew  people  whose  names  are  mentioned  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  in  the  apostolic 
Epistles.     But  to  the  imagination  they  are  separated 


FAPIAS.  22J 

from  all  the  rest  of  mankind.  It  is  forgotten  that 
Paul  must  have  had  innumerable  friends  in  Philippi, 
in  Thessalonica,  in  the  towns  of  Galatia,  in  Corinth, 
in  Ephesus,  in  Rome — friends,  who  for  twenty,  thirty, 
or  even  forty  years  after  his  death  must  have  had 
many  things  to  say  about  him  and  his '  teaching.  It 
is  forgotten  that  the  other  apostles  must  also  have 
had  innumerable  friends  in  different  parts  of  the 
world,  who  transmitted  to  the  next  generation  the 
substance  of  the  story  of  Christ  as  they  had  heard 
the  apostles  themselves  tell  it,  and  the  substance  of 
apostolic  doctrine.  Papias,  as  I  have  said,  knew  men 
who  were  friends  of  the  apostles  ;  and  he  knew  two 
men,  who,  though  they  were  not  apostles,  had  known 
Christ. 

I. 

He  was  bishop  of  Hicrapolis  in  Phrygia,  in  the 
first  half  of  the  second  century.  Hierapolis — it  is 
now  in  ruins — lay  a  few  miles  north  of  Laodicea  and 
about  one  hundred  miles  east  of  Ephesus,  A 
Christian  Church  was  formed  there  in  very  early 
times,  and  it  is  mentioned  by  Paul  in  his  Papistic  to 
the  Colossians  (Col.  iv.  13).  It  is  probable  that 
Papias  was  born  between  A.D.  60  and  A.D.  70  ;  his 
book",  entitled  An  Exposition  of  Oracles  of  the  Lord, 
was  probably  published  about  A.D.  135. 

He  had  excellent  opportunities  for  knowing  men 
who  had  known  the  apostles.  For  the  Apostle  John 
lived  in  Asia  Minor  during  most  of  the  thirty  years 


224  PAPIAS. 

between  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  A.D.  70  and  his  death 
at  the  end  of  the  century,  and  he  must  have  been  well 
known  to  a  large  number  of  the  ministers  and  mem- 
bers of  the  Churches  in  Ephesus,  Smyrna,  Laodicea. 
Hierapolis,  and  the  other  great  cities  of  the  pro- 
vince. Ephesus  was  his  usual  home  ;  there  he  died, 
and  there  he  was  buried.  In  the  time  of  Eusebius 
there  was  a  tomb  at  Ephesus  which  bore  his  name, 
and  which  was  regarded  by  the  Christians  with  affec- 
tion and  veneration. 

According  to  a  tradition  which  seems  to  be  trust- 
worthy, the  Apostle  Andrew  went  with  him  into  Asia 
Minor.  You  remember  the  earliest  notice  that  we 
have  of  these  two  friends.  Both  John  and  Andrew 
were  disciples  of  the  Baptist,  and  they  were  with 
their  master  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan  when  he 
delivered  his  great  testimony  to  Jesus  :  "  Behold  the 
Lamb  of  God."  The  rest  of  the  day  they  spent  with 
our  Lord,  and  they  were  His  first  disciples.  Till 
they  died,  the  memory  of  those  great  hours  must 
have  bound  their  hearts  together  in  unperishable  love. 

The  Apostle  Philip,  the  friend  of  Andrew,  settled 
in  Hierapolis.  Papias  knew  his  two  daughters,  and 
recorded  in  his  Exposition  what  Eusebius  describes 
as  a  "  wonderful  narrative,"  which  he  had  heard  from 
Ihcm.  Among  the  older  members  of  the  Church 
there  must  have  been  man)'  who  had  known  Philip 
himself  intimately.  Papias  also  met  persons  who  had 
known  several  others  of  the  apostles. 

In  his  Exposition  of  Oracles  of  the  Lord  he  made 


PAPIAS.  225 

use  of  what  the  friends  of  the  apostles  had  told  him. 
In  what  seems  to  have  been  a  letter  addressed  to  a 
friend  to  whom  the  book  was  dedicated  he  says  : 

"  I  will  not  scruple  also  to  give  a  place  .  .  .  along  with 
my  interpretations^  to  everything  that  I  learnt  carefully  and 
remembered  carefully  in  time  past  from  the  elders,  guaranteeing 
their  truth.'  .  .  .  On  any  occasion  when  any  person  came 
[in  my  way]  who  had  been  a  follower  of  the  elders,  I  would 
inquire  about  the  discourses  of  the  elders — what  was  said  by 
Andre7u,  or  by  Peter,  or  by  Philip,  or  by  Thomas  or  James,  or 
by  John  or  Maithe^v,  or  any  other  of  the  Lord's  disciples,  and 
what  Aristion  and  the  Elder  John,  tlie  disciples  oj  the  Lord, 
say.  For  I  did  not  think  that  I  could  get  so  much  profit  from 
the  contents  of  books  as  from  the  utterances  of  a  living  and 
abiding  voice." 

This  is  the  account  which  Papias  gives  of  the 
method  he  follows  in  his  Exposition.  The  work 
itself,  which  appears  to  have  been  a  considerable  one, 
has  been  lost  ;  nearly  all  the  brief  fragments  of  it 
which  remain  have  been  preserved  by  Eusebius  and 
Irenaius,  the  most  valuable  of  them  by  Eusebius. 
The  latest  trace  of  the  existence  of  the  book  itself 
is  in  an  inventory  of  the  possessions  of  the  cathedral 
at  Nismcs,  dated  A.D.  12 18.  As  the  Lectures  of 
Ephracm  and  the  Diatessaron  of  Tatian  have  been 
recently  recovered,  after  having  been  lost  for  many 
centuries,  the  Exposition  of  Papias  may  also  be  re- 
covered, and  it  would  be  more  valuable  than  cither 
of  them. 

'  lie  means  that  he  himself  assured  his  friend  of  the  accuracy 
of  his  reports  of  what  the  ciders  had  told  hini. 

L.  C.  15 


226  PAPIAS. 

His  reference  to  "  Aristion  and  the  Elder  John" 
is  rather  obscure.  The  sentence  is  clumsily  formed. 
It  might  convey  the  impression  that,  as  he  had  learnt 
from  the  friends  of  the  apostles  what  the  apostles  had 
said,  he  had  also  learned  from  the  friends  of  Aristion 
and  the  Elder  John  what  these  two  immediate  dis- 
ciples of  our  Lord  had  said.  But  this  was  not  his 
meaning.  He  tells  us  that  he  had  inquired  and  care- 
fully considered  what  was  said  by  the  apostles  ;  but 
when  he  comes  to  "  Aristion  and  the  Elder  John,"  he 
changes  the  tense  from  the  past  to  the  present,  and 
tells  us  that  he  had  considered  as  carefully  what  these 
two  men  say.  And  Eusebius,  who  had  the  complete 
work  of  Papias  in  his  hands,  states  distinctly,  on 
Papias's  own  authority,  that  Papias  himself  knew 
Aristion  and  the  Elder  John,  so  that  he  had  no  need 
to  rely  on  their  friends  for  reports  of  what  these  two 
men  had  said  about  Christ. 

It  appears  therefore  that  (i)  Papias  krcw  men 
who  were  friends  of  many  of  the  original  apostles  ; 
that  (2)  he  knew  two  women  who  were  daughters  of 
the  Apostle  Philip  ;  that  (3)  he  knew  two  men  who 
were  immediate  disciples  of  our  Lord  ;  that  (4)  he 
had  tried  to  learn  from  all  these  persons  what  they 
could  tell  him  about  Christ  and  about  what  had  been 
said  by  the  apostles  about  Christ ;  and  that  (5)  he  had 
used  what  they  had  told  him  in  his  Exposition.  He 
may  not  have  been  a  man  in  whose  critical  judgment 
we  could  place  any  great  confidence  ;  some  of  the 
traditions   of  our  Lord's   sayings  which  he   records 


PAPIAS.  227 

may  have  the  faults  of  all  similar  traditions,  and  may 
be  wholly  untrustworthy  ;  but,  as  I  think  I  shall  be 
able  to  show,  the  evidence  which  can  be  drawn  from 
him  in  support  of  the  historical  truth  of  the  first  three 
Gospels  is  of  decisive  weight. 

II. 

He  wrote  an  Exposition  of  Oracles  of  tJie  Lord. 
What  he  meant  by  "  Oracles  of  the  Lord,"  or,  as 
Dr.  Lightfoot  sometimes  translates  the  phrase,  "  Do- 
minical Oracles,"  appears  from  his  own  account  of 
Mark's  Gospel,  a  part  of  which  I  will  now  quote  ; 
it  will  be  necessary  to  quote  the  whole  passage  later 
on.     He  sa}-s  that,  according  to  "  the  elder," 

"Mark,  having  become  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  down 
accurately  everything  that  he  remembered,  without  however 
recording  in  order  luliat  tvas  cither  said  or  done  by  Christ.  For 
neitlicr  did  he  hear  the  Lord,  nor  did  he  follow  Him  ;  but  after- 
wards, as  I  said,  [attended]  Peter,  who  adapted  his  instruction 
to  the  needs  [of  his  hearers],  but  had  no  design  of  giving  a  con- 
nected account  of  the  Lord's  Oi-acles  [or  Discoiirses^P 

There  is  a  various  reading  in  the  Greek  text  of 
the  last  words  of  this  passage.  Some  authorities 
give  "Oracles,"  others  give  "  Words,"  or  "  Discourses  "  ; 
but  the  most  recent  critical  editor  has  adopted 
"  Oracles."  ^     If  this  is  the  true  reading,  then  Papias 

'  Lightfoot:  Essays  on  the  Work  entitled  '■^Supernatural 
Religion."  If  the  other  reading  is  adopted,  the  argument  in  the 
text  is  not  substantially  weakened.  The  later  statement— that 
Mark  did  not  intend  to  give  "a  connected  account  of  our  Lord's 
T^iscourses,"  or  "Teaching" — must  cover  the  same  ground  as 


228  PAP/AS. 

describes  Mark's  work  as  "  an  account  of  tJie  Lords 
Oracles "  ;  and  Papias's  own  book  is  an  exposition  of 
the  Lord's  "  Oracles  " ;  ^  that  is,  an  exposition  of 
"  what  was  said  or  done  by  Christ."  The  word 
Gospel  had  not  yet  come  into  use  as  the  title  of  a 
narrative  of  our  Lord's  Life. 

It  was  an  Exposition  of  Oracles  of  the  Lord,  not 
an  independent  account  of  our  Lord's  life  and 
ministry.  Side  by  side  with  his  own  interpretations 
he  quoted  what  the  apostles  themselves  had  said 
about  our  Lord  and  our  Lord's  teaching  to  persons 
whom  he  knew.  The  daughters  of  Philip  may  have 
told  him  many  things  which  they  had  heard  their 
father  say  about  Christ — about  His  doctrines  and 
about  His  precepts.  So  that  if  the  book  is  ever 
recovered,  we  may  find  in  it  Philip's  own  explanation 
of  the  singular  emphasis  in  the  question  addressed  to 
him  by  our  Lord  after  the  Last  Supper :  "  Have  I 
been  so  long  time  with  you,  and  dost  thou  not  know 
Me,  Philip  ?  .  .  .  How  saycst  t]tou,  Show  us  the 
Father? "as  though  there  was  something  exception- 
ally surprising  in  Philip's  failure  to  recognise  the 
Divine    glory    of  his    Master,    and    impl}-ing   that    a 

the  earlier  statement  that  he  did  not  record  ''  in  order  what  was 
cither  said  or  done  by  Christ " ;  and  an  exposition  of  the 
"Oracles"  must  cover  at  least  as  much  ground  as  an  account 
of  the  "  Discourses"  or  "  Teaching." 

^  The  phrase  in  Papias's  account  of  Mark's  Gospel  is  the 
same  as  that  in  his  own  title.  Mark  wrote  an  account  of  the 
Dominical  Oracles.  The  other  reading  would,  of  course,  give 
Donii/iical  D/sioii/ scs  or  Tccichimr. 


PA  PI  AS.  229 

similar  failure  in  Matthew  or  any  of  the  others  would 
have  occasioned  our  Lord  a  less  keen  disappointment. 

III. 

We  return  now  to  his  account  of  Mark's  Gospel, 
and  I  will  give  the  whole  passage  as  it  stands  in 
Eusebius. 

"And  the  elder  said  this  also:  Mark,  having  become  the 
interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  down  accurately  everything  that  he 
remembered,  without  however  recording  in  order  what  was 
either  said  or  done  by  Christ.  For  neither  did  he  hear  the 
Lord,  nor  did  he  follow  Him  ;  but  afterwards,  as  I  said,  [attended] 
Peter,  who  adapted  his  instructions  to  the  needs  [of  his  hearers], 
but  had  no  design  of  giving  a  connected  account  of  the  Lord's 
oracles  [or  discourses].  So  then  Mark  made  no  mistake,  wliile 
he  thus  wrote  down  some  things  as  he  remembered  them  ;  for 
he  made  it  his  one  care  not  to  omit  anything  that  he  heard,  or 
to  set  down  any  false  statement  therein."  ^ 

That  you  may  estimate  the  real  importance  of  this 
testimony,  I  must  remind  you  once  more  that  Papias 
had  known  men  who  were  the  personal  disciples 
of  seven  of  the  apostles — of  John,  of  Matthew,  of 
Andrew,  of  Peter,  of  Philip,  of  Thomas,  of  James. 
When  he  met  them  he  used  to  ask  them  what  the 
apostles  had  said  about  our  Lord.  He  knew  two 
daughters  of  the  Apostle  Philip  ;  they  belonged  to 
the  Church  of  which  he  was  bishop,  and  they  lived 
to  a  great  age.  He  also  knew  two  men  who  were 
immediate   disciples   of  our  Lord.      With    all  these 

'  Eusebius  :  Ecclesiastical  History^  book  iii.,  cap.  39. 


230  PA  PI  AS. 

sources  of  information  concerning  our  Lord's  life  and 
teaching,  he  declares  that  the  Gospel  of  Mark  is  an 
authentic  narrative.  It  is  certain,  therefore,  that 
our  second  Gospel,  in  its  substance,  contains  the 
very  story  that  was  told  by  the  original  apostles. 
These,  and  such  as  these,  are  the  miracles  which 
they  declared  that  Christ  had  worked.  These,  and 
such  as  these,  are  the  discourses  which  they  said 
that  Christ  had  delivered.  Men  whom  Papias  knew 
had  heard  the  story  of  Christ  from  the  apostles  ; 
Papias  asked  them  about  it,  and  Papias  says  that 
Mark  has  preserved  the  story  which  was  told  by 
Peter.  If  Peter  and  the  other  apostles  had  told  a 
different  story,  is  it  possible  that  Papias  could  have 
believed  that  Mark  recorded  the  story  told  by  Peter? 
The  two  daughters  of  the  Apostle  Philip  were  living 
in  the  city  where  Papias  lived,  were  members  of  the 
Church  of  which  Papias  was  bishop  ;  is  it  credible, 
if  Mark's  Gospel  contained  a  different  account  of 
Christ  from  that  which  these  women  had  heard  from 
their  father,  that  Papias  would  have  said  that  "  Mark 
made  no  mistake."  Aristion  and  "  the  presbyter 
John "  were  surviving  representatives  of  the  first 
generation  of  Christians,  disciples  of  our  Lord 
Himself;  is  it  credible  that  Papias,  who  knew  them 
and  who  talked  to  them  about  their  Master,  would 
have  accepted  Mark's  Gospel,  if  Mark's  account  of 
our  Lord  had  not  been  in  substance  the  same  as 
theirs  ? 


PAPIAS.  231 

IV. 

Papias  also  tells  us  something  about  Matthew's 
Gospel.     He  says  : 

"So  then  Matthew  composed  the  oracles  in  the  Hebrew 
language,  and  each  one  interpreted  them  as  he  could."  ' 

All  that  I  have  said  in  connexion  with  the  testi- 
mony of  Papias  to  the  second  Gospel  might  be  re- 
peated in  connexion  with  his  testimony  to  the  first. 
It  is  not  credible  that  Papias,  who  knew  men  that 
were  friends  and  disciples  of  seven  of  the  original 
apostles,  who  knew  two  women  \\\\o  were  the  daugh- 
ters of  one  of  them,  who  knew  two  of  the  original 
disciples  of  our  Lord,  would  have  received  the  first 
Gospel  as  Matthew's  if  it  had  contained  a  story 
which,  in  its  substance,  was  not  the  same  as  that 
which  the  apostles  themselves  had  told. 

V. 

But  this  is  not  an  adequate  statement  of  the  real 
strength  of  the  evidence  contained  in  the  passages 
which  I  have  quoted  from  Papias.  The  historical 
trustworthiness  of  the  Vowx  Gospels  does  not  rest 
on  the  sagacity  or  the  knowledge  of  individual  men. 
It  is  not  the  judgment  of  Papias  himself,  whatever 
materials  he  may  have  had  for  forming  it,  that  makes 
his  testimony  important.  It  is  apparent  that  while 
friends,  disciples,  and  children  of  the  apostles  were  still 

*  EUSKDIUS  :  Ecclesiastical  History ,  book  iii.,  cap.  39. 


233  PAPIAS. 

living,  and  while  some  who  had  known  Christ  were 
still  living,  our  first  and  second  Gospels  were  received 
— and  received  with  their  consent — as  containing  true 
accounts  of  our  Lord's  ministry.  The  friends  and 
disciples  of  apostles  received  them  as  containing  in 
substance  the  story  which  they  had  heard  the  apostles 
tell ;  the  children  of  an  apostle  received  them  as  con- 
taining the  story  which  they  had  heard  their  father 
tell ;  men  who  had  known  Christ  received  them  as 
containing  in  substance  the  story  of  Christ  which 
they  had  known  from  the  beginning — had  known,  in 
part,  from  what  they  themselves  had  heard  and  seen, 
in  part  from  what  had  been  told  them  by  their 
friends,  who  had  seen  miracles  which  they  did  not 
see,  and  heard  discourses  which  they  did  not  hear. 
Whether,  according  to  the  information  which  Papias 
had  from  "  the  elder,"  Mark  wrote  the  second  Gospel 
or  not  is  a  matter  of  secondary  importance.  Whether 
Matthew  originally  wrote  his  Gospel  in  Hebrew  is  a 
matter  of  less  importance  still.  The  main  point  is 
this  :  the  generation  of  Christians  that  heard  the  story 
of  Christ  from  the  apostles,  some  men  who  had 
known  Christ  Himself,  received  our  first  two  Gospels 
as  containing  a  true  account  of  what  our  Lord  had 
said  and  done.  After  the  lapse  of  nearly  eighteen 
hundred  years  I  see  them  standing  before  me — men 
who  had  kno\\'n  John,  and  Matthew,  and  Andrew, 
and  Peter,  and  Philip,  and  Thomas,  and  James, — the 
daughters  of  Philip — men  who  themselves  had  seen 
and  heard  our  Lord  ;  and  as  they  point  to  these  two 


PAPIAS.  233 

Gospels,  I  hear  them  say,  "  These  books  contain  the 
story  of  the  mighty  works  and  gracious  teaching  of 
Christ,  '  even  as  they  delivered  them  unto  us,  ^ho 
from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers 
of  the  word.' "  I  require  no  stronger  evidence.  For 
myself  I  am  satisfied.  In  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  and 
in  the  Gospel  of  Mark  I  am  sure  that  I  have,  in 
substance,  the  story  which  was  told  by  the  original 
apostles. 

VI. 

At  this  point  we  are  met  by,  I  will  not  say  a 
plausible  or  ingenious,  but  a  very  audacious  objec- 
tion. We  are  asked  to  believe  that  the  original 
Mark,  the  Mark  of  Papias,  the  Mark  whose  historical 
trustworthiness  is  so  strongly  authenticated,  has 
vanished  ;  has  vanished  we  know  not  how  ;  vanished 
we  know  not  exactly  when  ;  and  that  another  Mark 
has  taken  its  place ;  that  if  we  had  the  Mark  of 
Papias,  something  might  be  said  for  the  trustworthi- 
ness of  its  story ;  but  that  our  Mark  is  another  and  a 
later  document. 

Of  course  some  reasons  are  given  for  this  startling 
theory.  We  are  assured  that  since  Mark's  Gospel 
omits  many  most  interesting  facts  about  Peter  which 
are  contained  in  the  other  Gospels,  Mark  could  not 
have  obtained  his  materials  from  Peter's  preaching. 
We  are  reminded  that  our  Mark  is  just  as  orderly 
in  its  arrangement  as  Matthew  and  Luke,  but  that 
the   Mark  which  Papias   knew  did    not   record    "  in 


234  FAPIAS. 

order  "  what  was  said  and  done  by  our  Lord.  And, 
further,  it  is  argued  that  Mark's  record  of  what  he 
remembered  of  Peter's  preaching  must  have  been  a 
more  fragmentary  narrative  than  that  which  is  given 
in  our  second  Gospel. 

I  do  not  very  much  care  to  reply  to  these  objec- 
tions in  detail.  I  shall  discuss  presently  the  con- 
clusion which  is  drawn  from  them.  But  it  does  not 
seem  to  me  very  surprising  that  a  Gospel  composed 
from  materials  supplied  by  Peter's  preaching  should 
place  less  emphasis  than  the  other  Gospels  on  the 
eminent  position  of  Peter  in  the  apostolic  company, 
and  should  omit  some  things  greatly  to  Peter's 
honour,  and  some  things  greatly  to  his  discredit, 
which  the  other  Gospels  contain.  As  for  the  "  order  ' 
of  the  second  Gospel,  it  is  not  quite  the  same  as 
Luke's,  it  is  very  different  from  John's  ;  and 
Papias,  after  what  he  had  learnt  from  the  friends  of 
the  apostles  or  from  the  daughters  of  Philip,  may 
have  concluded  that  either  Luke's  arrangement  or 
John's  was  better  than  Mark's.  Or  he  may  have 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  none  of  the  evangelists 
had  followed  the  actual  chronological  order  of  the 
events  of  our  Lord's  history.  That  Papias  gives  the 
impression  that  the  Mark  which  he  had  was  more 
fragmentary  than  our  Mark  is  an  objection  which 
hardly  needs  discussion. 

It  is  also  maintained  that  his  account  of  Matthew's 
Gospel  shows  that  he  had  quite  a  different  Matthew 
from    that   which   stands    first  of  our   four.     Papias 


PAPIAS. 

describes  Matthew's  work  as  a  collection  of  "  Oracles  " 
{logia),  and  we  are  told  that  this  means  a  collection 
of  our  Lord's  discourses  ;  but  our  Matthew  is  not 
simply  a  collection  of  discourses,  it  contains  a  large 
amount  of  narrative  matter.  This  limitation  of  the 
meaning  of  the  word  "  Oracles  "  cannot  however  be 
maintained.  When  Paul  says  that  the  Jews  were 
entrusted  with  "  the  Oracles  of  God,"  ^  he  means  that 
they  had  the  keeping  of  the  whole  of  the  sacred 
Scriptures,  not  merely  the  keeping  of  those  parts  of 
them  which  record  words  that  came  direct  from  the 
Divine  lips  ;  in  bulk  these  form  a  very  inconsiderable 
part  of  the  Old  Testament.  When  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  speaks  of  "  the  first  principles 
of  the  Oracles  of  God,"  ^  it  is  clear  that  he  is  thinking 
of  the  principles  of  the  Divine  order  which  are 
implicated  in  the  whole  story  of  the  relations  between 
God  and  the  Jewish  people  as  recorded  in  their 
sacred  books.  Clement  of  Rome,  writing  in  the  first 
century,  uses  the  phrase  as  s}'non}'mous  with  "  the 
sacred  Scriptures  "  :  "  ye  know,  beloved,  and  ye  know 
well,  the  sacred  Scriptures,  and  have  studied  the 
Oracles  of  God."  ^  Philo  of  Alexandria  quotes  as  an 
"Oracle  "4  the  narrative  in  Genesis  iv.  15,  "  The  Lord 
God  set  a  mark  upon  Cain,  lest  any  one  finding  him 
should  kill  him."      Papias  himself,  as  we  have  seen. 


*  Rom.  iii.  2.  -  Heb.  v.  12.  ^  C/cm.  I^oin.  53. 

*  LlGHiFOOT:  Essays  on  tlie  Work  entitled '■'■  Supernatural 
Religion^'  p.  174.     See  the  whole  passage. 


236  PAP/AS. 

describes  Mark's  story  of  what  was  said  and  done  by 
Christ  as  an  "  account  of  the  Lord's  Oracles." 

The  word  "  Oracles  "  covers  both  the  discourses  of 
our  Lord  and  the  account  of  His  Birth,  Temptation, 
Miracles,  Death,  and  Resurrection. 

The  second  objection  to  identifying  our  Matthew 
with  the  Matthew  of  Papias  is  more  serious.  He 
says  that  Matthew  composed  the  Oracles  "  iii  the 
Hebreiv  language,  and  each  one  interpreted  thcvi  as  lie 
could"  It  is  maintained  that  this  implies,  not  only 
that  Matthew  wrote  his  book  in  Hebrew — the  Aramaic 
dialect  spoken  by  the  Jews  in  Palestine — but  that  in 
the  time  of  Papias  there  was  no  authorized  transla- 
tion of  it  into  Greek  for  the  use  of  those  who  did  not 
speak  Aramaic  ;  that  to  Papias  therefore  a  Greek 
Matthew  was  unknown.  This  however  is  not  a 
legitimate  inference  from  his  statement.  He  does  not 
say,  "  Matthew  composed  the  Oracles  in  the  Hebrew 
language,  and  each  one  interprets  them  as  he  can" 
but  "  Matthew  composed  the  Oracles  in  the  Hebrew 
language,  and  each  one  interpreted  them  as  he  could." 
This  implies  that  in  the  time  of  Papias  it  was  no 
longer  necessary  that  each  man  should  interpret  the 
Aramaic  original  for  himself  and  "  as  he  could  "  ; 
there  was  already  a  Matthew  in  Greek.  The  legi- 
timate conclusions  to  be  drawn  from  the  statement 
of  Papias  are  these:  (i)  While  friends  and  disciples 
of  the  original  apostles  were  still  living,  and  while 
some  men  were  still  living  who  had  known  our 
Lord,  there  was  a  Greek  narrativ'e  of  our  Lord's  life 


PAriAS.  23'/ 

and  teaching  which  was  accepted  as  Matthew's  ; 
(2)  Papias  had  been  told,  on  what  he  behevcd  to  be 
good  authority,  that  this  narrative  was  originally 
written  in  Hebrew. 

It  is  this  second  inference  which  creates  a  difficulty, 
and  a  difficulty  which  has  not,  I  think,  received  any 
satisfactory  solution.  There  is  a  general  agreement 
among  scholars  that  our  Matthew  is  not  a  mere 
translation  of  a  Hebrew  original.  Dr.  Lightfoot 
refuses  to  concede  that  "  it  cannot  have  been  trans- 
lated from  the  Hebrew  at  all,"  and  he  thinks  that  it 
would  be  nearer  the  truth  to  say  that  "  it  is  not 
a  homogeneous  Greek  version  of  a  homogeneous 
Hebrew  original."  ^  The  question  resolves  itself  into 
the  larger  one  which  is  raised  by  the  coincidences 
and  differences  between  the  first  three  Gospels,  a 
question  which  cannot  be  discussed  in  these  Lectures. 

VH. 

Whatever  may  be  the  true  solution  of  this  last 
difficulty,  the  theory  that  our  Matthew  and  our  Mark 
arc  not  the  Matthew  and  Mark  of  Papias  is  un- 
tenable. It  requires  us  to  believe  that  a  Gospel 
attributed  to  Mark,  and  supposed  to  preserve  the 
account  of  our  Lord's   Life  and    Ministry  given  by 

*  Lightfoot  :  Essays  on  the  Work  cniitlcd  "  Siipcrnatiind 
Rdii^ion,''  p.  170.  The  question  is  fully  discussed  in  Bleek's 
Introduction  to  the  New  Testament^  and  other  similar  works. 
See  also  Salmon's  Historical  Introduction  to  tJic  Study  of  the 
Books  of  the  Xciu  Testament,  Lcct.  x. 


238  PAPIAS. 

Peter,  was  in  common  use  among  the  disciples 
of  Peter  and  John  and  Andrew  when  the  second 
century  began  ;  that  this  was  lost,  and  a  different 
Gospel,  supposed  to  be  Mark's,  v>-as  being  read  in 
the  Christian  assemblies  in  the  middle  of  the  century.. 
As  if  the  disappearance  of  one  Gospel  were  not 
enough,  we  are  required  to  believe  that  another 
Gospel  shared  the  same  fate.  At  the  beginning  of 
the  century  the  Church  had  a  narrative  of  our  Lord's 
Ministry,  which  the  immediate  disciples  and  personal 
friends  of  the  original  apostles  believed  was  written 
by  an  apostle,  by  Matthew.  In  the  middle  of  the 
century  it  had  still  a  narrative  of  our  Lord's  Ministry 
which  was  believed  to  have  been  written  by  Matthew  ; 
but  we  are  required  to  believe  that  the  first  Matthew, 
the  true  Matthew,  had  slipped  out  of  the  hands  of 
the  Church,  and  that  another  Matthew,  a  false  Mat- 
thew— written  we  know  not  when,  we  know  not  by 
whom — had  quietly  taken  its  place.  That  within 
half  a  century  two  Gospels,  each  of  them  having 
such  high  authority,  should  have  been  lost,  and  that 
two  others  should  have  taken  their  place,  and  should 
have  been  regarded  by  all  Christian  Churches  as  the 
very  Gospels  that  had  fallen  into  disuse  and  dis- 
appeared within  the  memory  of  large  numbers  of 
living  men,  is  extravagantly  improbable. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  original  Matthew 
and  the  original  Mark  were  never  actually  displaced, 
but  that  they  \\zx&  gradually  changed  by  the  addition 
of  new  and  spurious  narratives  and  discourses,  until 


PA  PI  AS.  239 

at  last  they  became  practically  new  Gospels.  This  is 
an  impossible  theory.  If  copies  of  the  Gospels  had 
been  in  a  very  few  hands  between  A.D.  100  and  A.D. 
150,  and  if  a  strong  central  authority  had  existed 
which  could  have  controlled  the  additions  made  to 
the  original  text,  the  theory,  though  without  a  par- 
ticle of  evidence  to  support  it,  might  not  have  been 
wholly  incredible.  But  the  Gospels  were  widely 
scattered  ;  there  was  no  central  authority  to  control 
the  interpolations  and  modifications  of  the  text ;  and 
if  this  process  of  gradual  change  had  gone  on  dur- 
ing fifty  years,  there  would  have  been  a  countless 
variety  in  the  contents  of  each  one  of  the  Gospels. 
One  Matthew,  one  Mark  would  have  contained  twice 
as  much  as  another ;  one  would  have  contained  large 
masses  of  material  not  found  in  another ;  for  the 
growth  would  have  gone  on  independently  in  dif- 
ferent countries  ;  and  these  differences  would  have 
survived  in  ancient  MSS.  and  versions.  But,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  no  such  differences  exist.  Here  and 
there  an  interpolation  may  be  detected,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  account  of  the  angel  who  descended  and 
troubled  the  water  in  the  Pool  of  Bcthcsda  ;  but  that 
an  interpolation  can  be  detected  shows  that  the  MSS. 
preserve  the  Gospels  as  they  were  originally  written  ; 
the  errors  of  copyists  and  editors  may  be  corrected 
by  a  comparison  of  copies  ;  and  the  occasional  inter- 
polations, which,  perhaps,  generally  arose  from  the 
transfer  into  the  text  of  an  explanation  or  an  illus- 
trative  fact  which  some  cnp)-ist  had   written  in  the 


240  PA  PI  AS. 

margin,  are  too  few  and  too  easily  recognisable  to  be 
of  any  serious  importance. 

If  our  Gospels  are  not  the  same  as  the  Gospels  of 
Papias,  the  original  Matthew  and  the  original  Mark 
have  been  lost — they  have  not  grown  into  the  Gos- 
pels which  have  inherited  their  name.  Only  the 
strongest  evidence  could  make  this  theory  of 
"growths  "  credible. 

But  all  the  evidence  is  on  the  other  side.  Papias 
wrote  and  published  his  Exposition  of  Oracles  of  the 
Lord  about  A.D.  135.  At  that  date  it  may  be  assumed 
that  the  Matthew  and  the  Mark  which  were  received  by 
the  Church  when  he  made  inquiries  about  them  from 
Aristion  and  "  the  Elder  John,'"'  from  the  disciples  of 
Andrew,  and  Peter,  and  Philip,  .and  Thomas,  and 
James,  and  John,  and  Matthew,  were  the  Matthew  and 
Mark  which  were  still  received  by  the  Church  ;  for 
he  was  not  writing  about  books  which  had  been  re- 
jected or  lost,  but  about  books  which  in  the  year  A.D. 
135  were  well  known,  and  which  were  received  as  con- 
taining the  authentic  story  of  Christ.  They  must  have 
been  the  same  books  that  were  known  to  the  disciples 
and  friends  of  the  original  apostles.  But  fifteen  }-ears 
later,  when  Justin  wrote  his  First  Apology,  Gospels 
containing  the  same  story  as  our  Matthew  and  Mark 
were  read  cxcxy  Sunday  in  the  Christian  assemblies. 
A  few  years  later  still,  our  Matthcu-  and  Mark  had  a 
place  in  Tatian's  Diatessaron.  How  did  it  happen 
that,  with  one  consent,  and  within  so  brief  a  period, 
tlie  Churches  all  o\cr  the  world  parted  w  ilh  the  true 


rAPIAS.  241 

Matthew  and  the  true  Mark  ?  How  did  it  happen 
that,  with  one  consent,  they  put  the  same  two  new 
Gospels  in  the  place  of  the  two  old  ones,  and  attri- 
buted to  them  the  authority  and  the  honour  of  the 
two  which  had  been  rejected  ?  ^ 

Finally,  Eusebius  gives  these  statements  of  Papias 
about  ]\Iatthcw's  Gospel  and  Mark's  Gospel  in  fulfil- 
ment of  his  promise  to  indicate  in  his  History  what- 
ever had  been  said  about  the  canonical  books  by 
earlier  writers.'-  Eusebius  had  in  his  hands  the  whole 
of  the  Exposition  from  which  the  statements  are 
extracted.  If  the  Matthew  and  Mark  of  Papias  had 
been  different  books  from  the  canonical  Matthew 
and  Mark,  Eusebius  could  not  have  failed  to  discover 
it.  The  Matthew  and  Mark  of  Papias  were  the 
Matthew  and  Mark  of  Eusebius  ;  and  the  Matthew 
and  Mark  of  Eusebius — about  this  there  is  no  dis- 
pute— are  the  Matthew  and  Mark  of  our  own  New 
Testament. 

VIII. 

In  the  fragments  of  this  ancient  writer  preserved 
by  Eusebius  there  are  no  references  to  either  the 
Third  or  the  Fourth  Gospel.  It  does  not  follow  that 
the  Exposition  itself  contained    no   quotations    from 

*  That  the  so  called  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  could  not  have 
been  the  original  of  the  Greek  Matthew  which  was  known  to 
the  Church  in  the  second  century,  is  conclusively  shown  in  the 
tenth  Lecture  of  Dr.  Salmon's  Introduction. 

*  See  ante,  p.  no. 

L.  C.  16 


242  PAPIAS. 

these  Gospels,  or  no  comments  upon  them.  You  will 
remember  that  Eusebius  did  not  propose  to  give  mere 
quotations  that  he  found  in  early  writers,  when  these 
quotations  were  from  books  about  whose  authority 
there  was  no  dispute  ;  and  the  authority  of  none  of 
the  Four  Gospels  had  ever  been  disputed.  It  was 
only  when  he  found  some  interesting  statements 
about  the  undisputed  books  that  he  proposed  to  give 
them  a  place  in  his  history.  What  Papias  had  said 
about  the  relation  of  Mark's  narrative  to  the  preach- 
ing c>f  Peter,  and  about  the  language  in  which  Mat- 
thew's "  Oracles  "  were  originally  written,  seemed  to 
Eusebius  sufficiently  interesting  to  be  recorded.  It 
is  to  be  assumed  that  Papias  had  said  nothing  equally 
interesting  about  the  Gospels  of  Luke  and  John. 

But  while,  as  a  rule,  Eusebius  does  not  take  any 
notice  of  mere  quotations  from  books  which  were 
universally  received,  he  sets  the  rule  aside  in  the  case 
of  the  First  Epistle  of  John  and  the  First  Epistle  of 
Peter,  although  these  were  among  the  undisputed 
books.^  Accordingly  he  informs  us  that  Papias 
"  made  use  of  testimonies  from  the  First  Epistle  of 
John."  ^  But  if  Papias  used  John's  P^irst  Epistle,  he 
must  also  have  used  John's  Gospel  ;  if  he  acknow- 
ledged the  authority  of  the  Epistle,  he  must  also 
have  acknowledged  the  authority  of  the  Gospel.  For 
the   Epistle  is  a  supplement   to  the  Gospel  ;  it  de- 


'  See  ante^  pp.  no,  in. 

*  Ecclesiastical  History,  book  iii.,  cap.  xxxix. 


PAPIAS.  243 

vclops  the  dogmatic  and  ethical  contents  of  the 
Gospel  ;  it  illustrates  and  applies  them  ;  the  two  are 
inseparable  ;  Epistle  and  Gospel  are  vitally  and 
organically  one. 

IX. 

The  argument  from  Papias  for  the  historical  trust- 
worthiness of  the  story  of  Christ  contained  in  our  New 
Testament  is  not  yet  exhausted.  As  I  said  earlier  in 
this  Lecture,  the  narratives  of  our  Lord's  life  and 
teaching  were  not  in  his  time  called  "  Gospels  "  ;  or 
if  that  title  was  ever  given  to  them,  it  was  not  in  com- 
mon use.  Matthew's  narrative  he  calls  the  "  Oracles  "  ; 
Mark's,  an  "  Account  of  the  Lord's  Oracles."  But 
"  Oracles  "  was  the  title  given  to  sacred  books.  To 
Paul  the  ancient  Scriptures  of  the  Jewish  people  were 
the  "Oracles  of  God."  To  Philo,  the  great  Jewish 
scholar  of  Alexandria,  the  narrative  parts  of  the  Old 
Testament,  as  well  as  the  words  of  Jehovah,  were 
"  Oracles."  To  Clement  of  Rome  the  Jewish  Scrip- 
tures were  also  "  Oracles  of  God."  When  Papias 
gives  this  great  title  to  the  narratives  of  Matthew 
and  Mark,  he  attributes  to  them  the  same  dignity, 
the  same  authority,  the  same  sac  redness  that  was 
attributed  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is 
inconceivable  that  this  was  his  private  act.  The  title 
may  have  been  given  to  the  books  by  the  personal 
friends  and  disciples  of  Andrew,  and  Peter,  and 
James,  and  John,  and  Thomas,  and  Matthew  ;  it  was 
certainly  given   to   them   by  those  who  had   known 


244  PA  PI  AS. 

the  friends  of  these  apostles.  Already  these  two 
narratives  were  not  mere  common  books  ;  they  were 
"  sacred  Scriptures."  Papias  wrote  an  exposition  of 
them,  an  Exposition  of  Oracles  of  the  Lord.  That 
books  which  commanded  this  affection  and  reverence 
among  the  friends  of  men  who  had  known  the  ori- 
ginal apostles — books  to  which  they  attributed  so 
great  an  authority,  books  which  they  regarded  as 
sacred  Scriptures — should  have  been  suffered  to  dis- 
appear within  a  single  generation,  leaving  no  trace 
behind  them,  and  that  they  should  have  been  imme- 
diately replaced  by  other  books  inheriting  their 
names  and  inheriting  their  sacredness ;  that  the 
Christian  Churches  in  every  part  of  the  world,  in 
Rome,  in  Carthage,  in  Alexandria,  in  Jerusalem,  in 
Asia  Minor,  in  Southern  Gaul,  should  have  silently 
consented  to  part  with  the  old  Gospels  and  to  receive 
the  new  ;  and  that  they  should  all  have  believed  that 
the  new  were  the  same  as  the  old — this  is  impossible. 
Strip  the  theory  of  the  infinite  ingenuity,  the  learn- 
ing, the  brilliance  of  exposition  by  which  its  real 
nature  and  form  have  been  concealed,  and  it  ceases 
to  be  even  arguable.  The  miracles  recorded  in  the 
Four  Gospels,  these  are  credible ;  but  the  miracles 
which  this  hypothesis  requires  us  to  receive  are 
incredible.  For  if  it  is  true,  then  there  was  a  sus- 
pension of  some  of  the  most  ordinary  and  certain 
laws  of  human  thought  and  conduct,  a  suspension 
extending  over  many  years  and  operating  in  tens  of 
thousands  of  men,  belonging  to  different  races  and 


PAFIAS.  245 

living  in  many  lands.  This  is  asking  us  to  believe 
too  much  ;  the  demands  of  the  new  criticism  are 
more  exorbitant  than  the  demands  of  the  old  faith. 
For  myself,  I  cannot  submit  to  them  ;  and  I  therefore 
continue  to  believe  that  our  Matthew  and  our  Mark 
are  the  same  Matthew  and  the  same  Mark  that  were 
regarded  as  "  Oracles  of  the  Lord,"  sacred  Scriptures, 
by  those  who  had  known  the  friends  and  disciples  of 
the  original  apostles.  They  contain  in  substance  the 
story  of  Christ  that  was  told  by  Peter,  and  James, 
and  Andrew,  and  Philip,  and  Thomas,  and  Matthew, 
and  John. 


LECTURE   XIII. 

POLY  CARP. 

I. 

POLYCARP,  bishop  of  Smyrna,  was  martyred 
A.D.  155  or  156.^  The  proconsul  urged  him  to 
deny  his  faith,  and  save  his  Hfe  :  "  Swear,  and  I  will 
set  thee  at  liberty  ;  reproach  the  Christ/'  Polycarp 
answered,  "  Eighty  and  six  years  have  I  served  Him, 
and  He  never  did  me  any  wrong  ;  how  then  can  I 
blaspheme  my  King,  my  Saviour  ? "  I  suppose  that 
he  meant  to  say  that  he  had  served  Christ  from  his 
birth,  and  he  was  therefore  born  about  A.D.  70.  His 
parents  were  probably  Christians  ;  in  any  case  he 
must  have  received  baptism  and  been  instructed  in 
the  Christian  Faith  in  early  childhood. 

Only  fifteen  years  before  he  was  born — perhaps 
only  twelve  years— Paul's  long  stay  in  Ephesus  had 
come  to  an  end.  In  all  the  cities  of  Asia  Minor  the 
remembrance  of  the  great  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  was 

*  The  date  which  has  been  comnionly  received  is  A.D.  166 
or  167.  The  earHcr  date  is  the  rcsuU  of  recent  investigations. 
See  LlGllTFOOT,  Essays  on  the  Work  cut  i I  led  '■'■  Siipciiiatii]  al 
Pe/ii^ion,^'  pp.  103,  104. 


POL  YCARP.  247 


still  fresh ;  and  the  parents  of  Polycarp,  and  his 
early  religious  teachers,  may  have  received  the  Chris- 
tian Gospel  from  Paul  himself 

About  the  time  of  his  birth,  if,  as  I  suppose,  he  was 
born  in  A.D.  70,  the  Apostle  John,  the  Apostle  Philip, 
probably  the  Apostle  Andrew,  and,  with  them,  other 
men  who  were  the  immediate  disciples  of  our  Lord 
settled  in  Asia  Minor./  John  spent  the  greater  part 
of  the  remaining  years  of  his  life  at  Ephesus.  At 
John's  death  Polycarp  was,  at  least,  thirty  years  of 
age. 

Polycarp  had  known  John.  You  will  remember 
the  letter  of  Iren?eus  to  Florinus,  which  I  had  occa- 
sion to  quote  in  a  former  Lecture- — the  letter  in 
which  he  reminds  his  friend  of  the  time  when  they 
listened  to  Polycarp  together.  "  I  can  describe," 
says  Irenaius,  "the  very  place  in  which  the  blessed 
Polycarp  used  to  sit  when  he  discoursed,  and  liis 
goings  out  and  his  comings  in,  and  his  manner  of 
life,  and  his  personal  appearance,  and  the  discourses 
which  he  held  before  the  people,  and  how  Jie  ivonid 
describe  his  intercourse  zvilJi  John  and  ivith  the  rest 
-ivho  had  seen  the  Lord,  and  Jioiv  he  would  relate  their 
ivords.  And  whatsoever  things  he  had  heard  from 
them  about  the  Lord,  and  about  His  miracles,  and 
about  His  teaching,  Polycarp,  as  having  received  them 
from  eye-ivitnesses  of  the  life  of  the  Word,  ivoidd  relate 
altogether  in  accordance  ivith  the  Scriptures." 


Sec  a/t/c,  pp.  223-225.  ■■'  Sec  /(///>■,  p.  146. 


248  rOL  YCARP. 


When  Ignatius  passed  through  Smyrna  on  his  way 
to  martyrdom  in  Rome — about  A.D.  iio^ — Polycarp 
was  bishop  of  the  Church  in  that  city.  He  must  then 
have  been  about  forty  years  of  age. 

For  the  next  forty  years  he  was  the  most  con- 
siderable of  all  the  bishops  of  the  Asiatic  Churches  ; 
and  to^^'ards  the  end  of  his  life  he  travelled  from 
Smyrna  to  Italy,  to  discuss  with  Anicetus,  the  bishop 
of  Rome,  the  difference  of  practice  between  the 
Churches  of  Asia  and  the  Churches  of  the  West  in 
relation  to  the  celebration  of  Easter.  During  this 
visit,  his  testimony  to  the  true  Faith  led  many  who 
had  received  the  doctrines  of  Valentinus  and  Mar- 
cion  to  renounce  their  heresies.  He  was  martyred, 
as  I  have  said,  in  A.D.  155  or  156. 

n 

Irenaeus  speaks  of  the  epistles  which  he  wrote  to 
neighbouring  Churches  to  confirm  their  faith,  and  to 
some  of  his  brethren.     Of  these  one  only  remains. 

Soon  after  Ignatius  left  Smyrna,  Polycarp  wrote  a 
letter — he  "  and  the  presbyters  with  him  " — to  "  the 
Church  of  God  sojourning  at  Philippi "  ;  and  this  is 
the  letter  which  has  been  preserved.  It  was  written 
at  the  request  of  the  Philippian  Christians,  and  con- 
sists very  largely  of  exhortations  to  the  practice  of 

*  The  exact  date  is  uncertain.  "  The  earlier  date  assigned 
is  about  A.D.  107,  and  the  later  about  A.D.  116." — Lightfoot  : 
Essays^  etc.,  p.  59. 


FOL  YCARP.  249 


the  Christian  virtues,  to  steadfastness  of  hope  and 
firmness  of  faith,  to  patience,  to  meekness,  to  brotherly 
love,  to  prayer,  and  to  fasting.  It  contains  warnings 
against  covetousncss,  evil-speaking,  false  witness, 
and  the  spirit  of  revenge.  There  arc  exhortations 
addressed  to  presbyters,  to  deacons,  to  young  men, 
young  women,  and  widows  ;  and  they  are  cautioned 
against  receiving  the  teaching  of  men  who  would 
draw  them  from  the  truth.  There  are  some  sorrow- 
ful sentences  about  Valcns,  who  had  been  a  presbyter 
of  the  Church,  but  who  had  fallen  into  sin.  At  the 
close  of  the  epistle  he  tells  the  Philippians  that  he  is 
sending  them  the  letters  which  Ignatius  had  written 
to  himself,  and  to  the  Church  of  Smyrna,  and  to  some 
other  persons  or  Churches  ;  and  he  asks  them  to  let 
him  know  anything  that  they  had  heard  about  Igna- 
tius and  those  that  were  with  him.  Polycarp  either 
knew  or  assumed  that  Ignatius  had  suffered  martyr- 
dom, but  had  received  no  certain  information  either 
about  his  sufferings  or  how  he  bore  them. 

The  letter  shows  that  Polycarp  was  a  devout, 
earnest,  and  humble-minded  man,  very  solicitous 
about  the  practical  righteousness  of  those  who  bore 
the  Christian  name,  and  for  the  peace  of  Christian 
Churches  ;  but  it  gives  no  proof  of  any  considerable 
intellectual  power,  and  is  singularly  destitute  of 
originality. 

He  had  been  educated  as  a  Christian  from  his 
childhood  ;  and  his  memory  was  charged  with  the 
writings  of  the  apostles.     The  letter  is  a  short  one  ; 


250  rOL  YCAKP. 


it  covers  nine  rather  small  octavo  pages  in  Hcfele's 
edition  of  the  apostolic  Fathers,  and  there  are  foot- 
notes to  every  page ;  and  yet  Dr.  Lightfoot  finds 
"  decisive  coincidences  with,  or  references  to,  between 
thirty  or  forty  passages  in  the  New  Testament."^ 
Dr.  Charteris,  in  his  Canonicity,  makes  what  he  calls 
the  "  quotations  "  and  the  "  echoes  "  from  New  Testa- 
ment writers  much  more  numerous.  By  "  echoes  " 
he  means  passages  in  which  the  thought  or  phrase  has 
evidently  been  shaped  by  the  remembrance  of  some 
New  Testament  sentence. 

Polycarp  had  a  great  admiration  for  "  the  blessed 
and  glorious  Paul,"  and  reminds  the  Philippians  of 
the  Epistle  which  Paul  had  written  to  them  ;  and 
there  are  definite  quotations  or  distinct  "echoes" 
of  Paul's  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  Galatians, 
Corinthians,  Romans,  Philippians,  Colossians,  PZphc- 
sians,  and  of  the  two  Epistles  to  Timothy.  There 
is  a  striking  *'  coincidence "  with  a  passage  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.  There  is  a  trace — not  very 
decisive — of  the  Epistle  of  Judc.  Peter's  First  Epistle 
had  impressed  Polycarp  very  deeply ;  the  frequency 
with  which  he  quotes  it  is  remarkable. 

He  quotes  our  Lord  as  saying,  "The  spirit  indeed 
is  willing,  but  the  flesh  is  weak,"  in  the  precise  form 
in  which  the  words  are  given  in  Matthew  xxvi  41 
and  Mark  xix.  38,  and  there  are  other  passages  which 
recall    our    first    three    Gospels.     For    example,    he 


*  LlGirri'OOT :  Essays,  etc.,  p.  94. 


POLYCARP. 


charges  the  Philippians  to  remember  what  the  Lord 
said  :  "  Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not  judged  ;  forgive, 
and  it  shall  be  forgiven  unto  you  ;  pity,  that  ye  may 
be  pitied ;  with  what  measure  ye  mete,  it  shall  be 
measured  unto  you  again  ;  and  that  blessed  are  the 
poor,  and  those  who  are  persecuted  for  righteousness' 
sake  :  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  ^  This 
passage  is  made  up  from  words  of  our  Lord  in  Luke 
vi.  36-38,  20,  and  Matthew  v.  10.  There  are  other 
sayings  of  our  Lord  which  are  not  given  with  any 
formula  of  quotation  :  "  If  we  pray  the  Lord  to  for- 
give us,  we  also  ought  to  forgive  "  (cap.  vi.)  ;  "  And 
if  we  suffer  for  His  name,  let  us  glorify  Him  "  (cap. 
viii.)  ;  "  Pray  for  them  that  persecute  you  and  hate 
you,  and  for  the  enemies  of  the  cross,  that  your  fruit 
may  be  made  manifest  in  all  things,  that  ye  may 
be  therein  perfect "  (cap.  xii.).'  These  are  "  echoes  " 
rather  than  "  quotations." 

It  is  contended  that  as  the  first  passage  is  given 
as  an  express  quotation  of  what  our  Lord  said, — • 
"  remembering  what  the  Lord  said,  teaching  " — and 
that  as  (i)  there  is  no  passage  in  our  Gospels  in 
which  these  words  occur  in  the  order  in  which  Poly- 
carp  gives  them,  or  in  the  precise  form  in  which  he 
gives  them  ;  and  as  (2)  the  words,  "  pity,  that  ye  may 
be  pitied,"   do  not    occur  in  our  Gospels, — Polycarp 


^  Cap.  ii.  It  has  been  pointed  out  tliit  tlie  words  italicised 
occur  in  the  First  Epistle  of  Clement  of  Rome  (cap.  xiii.),  but 
not  in  our  Gospels. 

'^  Compare  Matt.  vi.  14,  scq.  ;  v.  1 1,  scq.  ;  v.  44,  48. 


rCL  YCARP. 


must  have  used  some  other  collection  of  our  Lord's 
sayings  ;  and  that  therefore  he  did  not  recognise  the 
authority  of  the  Gospels  in  our  canon. 

But  suppose  that  this  passage  contained  a  decisive 
proof  that  he  used  some  collection  of  our  Lord's  say- 
ings which  has  disappeared,  or  one  of  those  narratives 
of  what  Christ  had  said  and  done  and  suffered  which, 
according  to  Luke,  "  many  "  had  drawn  up,  how  does 
this  affect  the  authority  of  INLitthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and 
John  ?  We  know  that  such  "  narratives  "  existed  in 
the  early  days  of  the  Christian  Church  ;  they  dis- 
appeared, because  they  were  displaced  by  more 
complete  and  authentic  Gospels.  When  Polycarp 
was  a  child  and  his  Christian  education  began — he 
was  ten  years  old  in  A.D.  80 — he  may  have  received 
his  first  instruction  in  the  story  of  Christ  from  one 
of  these  earlier  narratives  ;  he  may  have  learnt  long 
passages  from  them  by  heart ;  and  the  words  of  our 
Lord,  as  he  had  learnt  them  in  childhood,  would 
occur  to  him  more  naturally  than  the  words  as  they 
appeared  in  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke,  although  he 
believed  that  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  were  more 
trustworthy.  Those  of  us  who  have  used  the  Re- 
vised Version  of  the  New  Testament  ever  since  it 
was  published,  and  who  believe  that  it  is  much  more 
accurate  than  the  Authorized  Version,  which  we  used 
when  we  were  children,  find  ourselves  quoting  the 
Authorized  Version  still  when  we  are  quoting  from 
memory ;  and  in  all  probability  we  shall  continue  to 
quote  it  to  our  dying  day.     We  know  that,  though 


POLY  CARP.  253 


the  later  version  is  more  accurate  than  the  earlier, 
the  substance  of  both  is  the  same.  And  if  Polycarp 
used  some  earlier  narrative  which  has  been  lost,  his 
quotations  from  it  only  confirm,  as  far  as  they  go, 
the  trustworthiness  of  our  present  Gospels.  In  the 
earlier  narratives  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  is  in  sub- 
stance the  same  as  in  the  more  authoritative  narratives 
which  displaced  them. 

I  deny  however  that  the  quotation  is  a  decisive 
proof,  or  a  proof  at  all,  that  he  used  an  earlier 
narrative.  He  has  drawn  together  precepts  of  our 
Lord  which  enforce  certain  gracious  Christian  vir- 
tues, and  he  recalls  certain  promises  which  encourage 
those  who  are  in  trouble  to  bear  their  troubles  with 
buoyant  hopefulness.  These  precepts  and  these 
promises,  he  says,  were  spoken  by  Christ.  Some  of 
them  he  gives  very  much  as  they  are  found  in  one  or 
other  of  our  Gospels  ;  others  are  given  in  substance, 
though  the  form  is  varied.  He  does  precisely  what 
Christian  preachers  are  doing  every  Sunda)'.  When 
we  say  that  Christ  has  given  us  certain  exhortations 
and  promises,  which  we  proceed  to  quote,  we  do  not 
mean  that  He  gave  them  in  the  order  in  which  we 
quote  them  ;  and  when  we  quote  from  memory,  ver> 
fnany  of  us  are  certain  to  give  them  in  a  form 
different  from  that  in  which  they  are  expressed  in 
the  Gospels.  The  remarkable  formula  with  which 
Pol)'carp  introduces  the  words  of  our  Lord,  all  of 
which  are  taken  from  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
"  Remembering  what  the  Lord  said,  teaching','  recalls 


251  POLYCARP. 


the  words  with  which  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is 
introduced  by  Matthew  :  "  When  He  had  sat  down, 
I  lis  disciples  came  unto  Him  ;  and  He  opened  His 
mouth,  and  tanglit  them,  saying,"  etc.  He  has 
blended  into  one  sentence  two  separate  Beatitudes ; 
but  his  account,  as  tested  by  our  Matthew  and  Luke, 
of  the  specific  blessings  which  are  promised  to  two 
specific  classes  of  persons  is  perfectly  accurate.  Now 
that  Christ  has  come  they  that  mourn  are  to  be  com- 
forted ;  the  meek  are  to  inherit  the  earth ;  they  that 
hunger  and  thirst  after  righteousness  are  to  be  filled; 
the  pure  in  heart  are  to  see  God ;  the  peacemakers  are 
to  be  called  the  children  of  God.  But  according  to 
Luke  our  Lord  declared  that  the  poor  are  blessed, 
because  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  according 
to  Matthew  that  the  poor  in  spirit  are  blessed, 
because  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  And  accord- 
ing to  Matthew  He  said,  "  Blessed  are  they  that 
have  been  persecuted  for  righteousness'  sake  :  for  theirs 
is  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  The  kingdom  of  God  or 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  promised  by  our  Lord  to 
two  descriptions  of  persons ;  and  it  is  to  these  same 
two  descriptions  of  persons  that,  according  to  Poly- 
carp,  our  Lord  assures  the  same  blessedness:  "Blessed 
are  the  poor,  and  those  who  are  persecuted  for  right- 
eousness'' sake :  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of  God." 
And  the  words,  "  Pity,  that  ye  may  be  pitied,"  are  in 
substance  identical  with  another  beatitude,  "  Blessed 
are  the  merciful,"  or  the  pitiful  :  "  for  they  shall  ob- 
tain mercy,"  or  pity.     There  is  nothing  in  Polycarp's 


rOLYCARP.  25s 

quotation  that  requires  us  to  believe  that  he  did  not 
use  our  Gospels. 

He  has  one  sentence  which  is  almost  verbally 
identical  with  i  John  iv.  3  :  "  For  whosoever  does 
not  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  has  come  in  the  flesh 
is  antichrist "  (cap.  vii.).  And  there  is  a  phrase  in 
which  it  is  difficult  not  to  recognise  an  echo  of  a 
phrase  in  the  same  chapter  of  the  same  Epistle. 
After  quoting  the  words  of  Peter  concerning  our 
Lord,  "  who  bore  our  sins  in  His  own  body  on  the 
tree,"  "  who  did  no  sin,  neither  was  guile  found  in 
His  mouth,"  he  adds,  "  but  endured  all  things  for  us, 
that  zve  might  live  in  Him"  Surely  there  were 
vaguely  present  in  Polycarp's  mind  the  words  of 
John  (i  John  iv.  9):  "Herein  was  the  love  of  God 
manifested  in  us,  that  God  hath  sent  His  only  be- 
gotten Son  into  the  world,  that  wc  might  live  through 
Him." 

HI. 

But  the  letter  contains  no  quotation  from  the 
Fourth  Gospel.  Nor  can  I  find  in  it  any  proof  that 
John's  characteristic  conception  of  our  Lord,  or  John's 
characteristic  theology,  had  exerted  any  power  over 
Polycarp's  religious  thought  and  life. 

The  Christ  of  Polycarp  is  the  Christ  of  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke,  not  the  Christ  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  The  light  and  the  fire  which  John  brought 
down  to  the  Church  from  the  heights  of  God,  of 
these  the  letter  shows  no  knowledge  ;  the  light  does 


256  rOL  YCARP. 

not  shine  there  ;  the  fire  docs  not  burn.  Polycarp 
seems  to  have  found  what  was  most  closely  akin  to 
his  own  life  in  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter.  He  had 
been  powerfully  influenced  by  Paul  ;  but  though  he 
knew  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  and  the  Ephc- 
sians,  there  is  as  little  trace  of  the  loftier  speculation 
of  Paul  as  of  the  mystical  theology  of  John.  The 
letter  gives  me  the  impression  that  his  Christian 
thought  and  life  had  received  their  definite  form 
before  he  came  under  John's  influence.  He  was 
thirty  years  old  when  John  died  ;  his  intimacy  with 
John  may  not  have  begun  till  he  was  twenty,  or  even 
five-and-twenty.  He  had  been  educated  in  the 
Christian  Faith  from  his  childhood  ;  his  conception 
of  the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ  and  the  type  of  his 
religious  character  were  already  fixed.  His  intellect, 
as  the  letter  shows,  was  of  a  very  ordinary  kind  ; 
after  he  reached  manhood,  he  was  not  likely  to  re- 
construct his  religious  thought  under  the  influence 
of  a  new  teacher.  For  John  he  had  a  deep  affection 
and  reverence  ;  but  his  theology — at  least,  when  he 
wrote  his  letter  to  the  Philippians — was  not  Johan- 
nine.  I  shall  have  to  recur  to  this  fact  later  in  the 
Lecture.     It  will  have  its  place  in  the  argument. 

It  may  be  said  that  Polycarp's  letter  is  too  brief  for 
such  large  conclusions  to  be  drawn  from  it.  But  the 
mystic  thought  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  of  John's 
First  Epistle  has  a  strange  power.  Wherever  it  finds 
its  way  it  gives  decisive  proofs  of  its  presence.  It  is 
like  one  of  those  strong  perfumes  which  fill  the  house 


rOLYCARP.  257 

with  their  odour.  It  is  masterful  in  its  authority.  It 
governs  speculation  ;  it  adds  a  new  quality  to  ethics  ; 
it  determines  the  whole  development  of  the  spiritual 
life.  If  Polycarp  had  been  Johannine  we  should  have 
known  it. 

John  stands  apart.  There  are  regions  of  thought 
in  Paul  ^\'hich  extend  to  the  very  confines  of  the 
kingdom  of  John  ;  but  John's  kingdom  remains  his 
own.  In  the  first  three  Gospels  there  are  hints  and 
sugfiiestions  of  the  Christ  who  stands  revealed  in  the 
Fourth,  but  they  are  only  hints  and  suggestions  ; 
there  are  gleams  of  that  transcendent  glory,  but  the 
gleams  are  transient  and  faint. 

There  are  other  contrasts  on  which  critics  have 
insisted  between  the  whole  contents  of  the  Gospels 
of  Matthew,  I^Iark,  and  Luke,  and  the  contents  of  the 
Gospel  of  John.  It  is  maintained  that  the  chrono- 
logy of  our  Lord's  ministry  as  related  by  John  is 
irreconcilable  with  its  chronology  as  related  by 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  :  that  according  to  the 
r^ourth  Gospel  the  principal  scene  of  our  Lord's 
ministry  was  in  Jerusalem  and  the  south  ;  according 
to  the  first  three,  on  the  shores  of  the  Lake  of  Galilee 
and  in  other  districts  of  the  north  :  that  the  first  three 
evangelists  represent  our  Lord's  teaching  as  having 
all  the  qualities  that  charm  great  crowds  of  imculti- 
vatcd  people,  as  being  familiar,  homely  in  its  illus- 
trations, rapid  in  its  transitions,  picturesque,  pi^iuant ; 
that  according  to  John  He  delivered  long,  elaborate, 
and  mystical  discourses  :  that  in  the  first  three  Gospels 

L.  C.  17 


rOLYCAKP. 


our  Lord's  chief  care  is  for  good  morals  ;  that  in  the 
Fourth  He  recurs  again  and  again,  in  private  and  in 
pubhc,  to  certain  mysterious  dogmas,  as  if  these  were 
of  supreme  importance,  and  is  ahvays  asserting  His 
Personal  claims  :  that  the  contrasts  are  so  vivid  and 
the  differences  so  profound,  that  if  John  has  given 
a  true  account  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke  have  missed  the  very  substance  of 
it ;  that  there  is  one  religion  in  the  first  three 
Gospels,  and  another  in  the  Fourth.  Finall}-,  we  are 
assured  that,  as  the  first  three  Gospels  preserve,  though 
with  many  legendary  and  m}'thical  accretions,  the 
true  substance  and  method  of  our  Lord's  teaching, 
it  is  impossible  that  John  or  any  other  of  our  Lord's 
personal  friends  could  have  written  the  Fourth  ;  and 
that  it  was  written  in  the  second  century  by  some 
unknown  author,  a  man  of  remarkable  genius,  whose 
Christian  Faith  had  been  transformed  by  the  mys- 
tical speculations  of  a  daring  philosophy,  which  had 
endeavoured  to  penetrate  the  secret  of  the  eternal  life 
of  God. 

The  differences  and  the  contrasts  have  been  enor- 
mously exaggerated.  The  ethical  perfection  de- 
manded in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  impossible 
apart  from  that  mysterious  birth  of  the  Spirit  of 
which  our  Lord  speaks  in  His  conversation  with 
Nicodemus,  and  that  mysterious  union  with  Himself 
which  is  illustrated  in  tlie  parable  of  the  vine  and 
the  branches.  When  He  places  His  own  personal 
authority    over  against    the  authority  of  the  law  of 


POL  YCARP.  259 


Moses  ;^  when  He  calls  to  Himself  all  that  labour 
and  arc  heavy  laden,  and  promises  that  He  will  give 
them  rest  ;  ^  when  He  says  that  all  things  have  been 
delivered  to  Him  by  the  Father,  and  that  no  one 
knoweth  the  Son  save  the  leather,  neither  doth  any 
know  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomso- 
ever the  Son  will  reveal  Him  ;  ^  when  He  declares 
that  He  will  come  in  His  glory,  and  all  the  angels 
with  Him  to  judge  the  nations  ^ — He  claims  a  great- 
ness as  august  and  awful  as  that  which  is  attri- 
buted to  Him  in  the  opening  verses  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  and  as  that  which  is  assumed  by  Himself 
in  the  discourse  which  He  delivered  and  the  prayer 
which  He  offered  during  the  night  of  His  betra}'al. 

IV. 

But  while  the  Christ  of  John  is  the  Christ  of  the 
earlier  evangelists,  the  differences  and  contrasts  be- 
tween his  Gospel  and  theirs  are  obvious  and  striking. 
How  do  they  affect  the  evidence  for  the  historical 
trustworthiness  of  John's  Gospel  ? 

In  the  Lecture  on  Papias  proof  was  given  that  our 
Matthew  and  our  I\Iark  were  written  and  known  and 
received  as  authentic  while  children  and  personal 
friends  and  immediate  disciples  of  the  original 
apostles  were  still  living,  while  some  men  who  had 
known    Christ    Himself    were    still    living.      These 


^  Malt.  V.  21,  22,  27,  28.  -  Malt.  .\i.  28. 

*  Matt.  xl.  27.  *  Matt.  xxv.  31-46. 


26o  POLY  CARP. 

Gospels  therefore  contain  in  substance  the  story 
of  our  Lord's  mhiistry  which  was  famiHar  to  the 
ministers  and  members  of  the  Christian  Churches  in 
Ephesus  and  Smyrna  and  Colosse,  and  throughout 
Asia  Minor.  Thc}-  contain  tlie  story  which  Polycarp 
had  known  from  his  childhood. 

How  then  came  Polycarp  to  accept  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  if  John  did  not  write  it,  if  it  did  not  appear 
till  some  years  after  John's  death  ?  The  differences 
between  this  new  account  of  our  Lord  and  the 
account  which  was  given  of  Him  in  the  Gospels  with 
which  he  had  been  familiar  for  so  long,  were  too  strike 
ing  to  be  missed.  It  contained  a  large  amount  of 
wholly  new  material — new  miracles,  new  discourses, 
The  new  material  was  in  many  respects  wholly  un- 
like thc  old  ;  the  picturesque  parables,  the  ethical 
precepts  of  the  earlier  Gospels,  had  disappeared  and 
given  place  to  long  discourses,  illustrating  the  deepest 
mysteries  of  the  life  of  God  and  the  life  of  man.  How 
then,  I  ask  again,  came  he  to  accept  it  ?  There  is 
only  one  answer  to  that  question.  He  knew  that  John 
wrote  it,  and  it  contained  the  very  representation  of 
our  Lord  that  he  had  been  accustomed  to  hear  from 
John  himself. 

If  the  new  Gospel  had  not  been  John's,  Polycarp 
would  have  found  nothing  in  its  characteristic  quali- 
ties to  attract  him.  V/e  have  seen  that,  as  far  as  wc 
can  judge  from  his  ICpistle  to  the  Philippians,  he  was 
untouched  by  those  religious  and  philosophical  specu- 
lations which  arc  supposed  to  have  transformed  thc 


rOLVCARP.  261 

original  simplicity  of  the  Christian  tradition  into  the 
profound  and  mystical  doctrine  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
His  intellect  was  not  speculative  and  adventurous, 
but  practical.  What  he  cared  for  was  the  traditional 
beliefs  and  plain  Christian  living.  He  was  very  little 
of  a  theologian.  He  was  nothing  of  a  mystic.  He 
held  fast  by  the  simpler  truths  and  duties  of  the 
Christian  Faith,  and  delighted  to  recall  the  very  words 
in  which  he  had  been  taught  them.  With  all  liis 
admiration  for  Paul,  whose  Epistles  he  knew  so  well, 
those  transcendent  regions  of  thought  which  are  illus- 
trated in  the  Epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  the  Ephe- 
sians  seem  to  have  had  no  charm  for  him  ;  in  his  own 
Epistle  to  the  Philippians  there  is  no  indication  tliat 
he  had  ever  visited  them.  Imagine  such  a  man  as 
this  discovering  that  a  Gospel  had  appeared  under 
the  name  of  John,  a  Gospel  wholly  unlike  the  Gospels 
he  knew,  a  Gospel  containing  a  representation  of  our 
Lord  wholly  unlike  that  which  had  been  given  by 
John  himself  during  the  years  that  he  had  been  John's 
disciple  and  friend  :  the  Churches  of  Asia  would  have 
rung  with  his  denunciations  of  the  fraud. 

The  stronger  the  contrasts,  the  profounder  the 
differences,  between  the  new  story  and  the  old,  the 
more  vigorous  and  vehement  would  have  been  Poly- 
carp's  hostility.  Every  fresh  article  in  the  elaborate 
indictment  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  on  the  ground  that 
it  differs  from  the  first  three,  adds  to  the  strength  of 
the  proof  that,  since  Polycarp  accepted  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  John  must  have  written  it. 


262  POL  YCARP. 


But  I  may  be  told  that  the  force  of  this  argu- 
ment depends  upon  the  assumption  that  Pol}xarp 
was  accustomed  to  read  the  story  of  Christ  in  our 
Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  ;  and  that  with  whatever 
satisfaction  I  may  regard  the  proofs  which  I  have 
given  in  previous  Lectures  that  these  Gospels  were 
in  common  use,  and  were  regarded  as  authoritative 
before  the  end  of  the  first  ccntur}^  I  have  no  right 
to  take  it  for  granted  that  the  proofs  will  be  equally 
satisfactory  to  everybody.  It  is  possible — so  it  may 
be  suggested — that  our  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  are 
of  later  origin,  and  that  to  Polycarp  they  were  wholly 
unknown. 

I  accept  the  suggestion  for  the  moment ;  it  adds 
fresh,  though  wholly  unnecessary,  support  to  an  argu- 
ment which  seems  to  me  already  irresistible. 

On  this  hypothesis  the  narratives  of  our  Lord's  life 
and  teaching  which  were  in  the  hands  of  Polycaip 
represented  an  earlier  form  of  the  Christian  tradition 
than  that  which  has  been  preser\'ed  in  any  of  our 
Gospels.  The  devotion  and  imagination  of  the  Church 
had  not  yet  surrounded  our  Lord  with  the  glory  which 
appears  in  even  our  Matthew  and  our  ]\Lirk,  much 
less  with  the  transcendent  glor}^  which  transfigures 
Him  in  John.  Those  earlier  narratives  contained 
fewer  and  less  impressive  assertions  of  His  personal 
greatness,  attributed  to  Him  fewer  and  less  remark- 
able miracles  and  a  simpler  kind  of  teaching.  On 
this  hypothesis  the  Christ  known  to  Pol}-carp,  the 
Christ  of  whom  he  had  heard  and  read  from  his  child- 


POLYCARP.  263 


hood,  was  a  Christ  in  whose  earthly  history  there  was 
even  less  of  the  m}\stcrious,  tlie  supernatural,  the 
Divine  than  in  the  Christ  of  our  first  three  Gospels. 

This  is  the  h}-pothesis.  How  then,  I  ask  again, 
are  we  to  account  for  Polycarp's  acceptance  of  John's 
Gospel  ?  If  the  contrasts  and  differences  between 
our  first  three  Gospels  and  the  Fourth  are  great,  the 
contrasts  and  differences  between  these  earlier  narra- 
tives and  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  greater  still.  It  may 
sometimes  be  difficult  for  ourselves  to  believe  that 
the  Christ  of  John  is  the  Christ  of  INIatthew,  Mark, 
and  Luke  ;  but  how  was  it  possible  for  Polycarp 
to  believe  that  the  Christ  of  John  was  the  Christ  of 
these  plainer  and  simpler  narratives?  Those  who 
deny  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  written  by  John 
gain  nothing  by  the  hypothesis  that  Polycarp  knew 
nothing  of  our  first  three  Gospels.  In  that  case  his 
acceptance  of  John  becomes  still  more  impressive. 
That  he  did  accept  it  is,  in  my  judgment,  absolutely 
certain. 

V. 

For  if  John  did  not  write  the  I'V)urth  Gospel,  when 
was  it  written  ?  Baur  placed  it  as  late  as  A.D.  170; 
but  subsequent  critics  that  deny  the  Johannine 
authorship  have  been  unable  to  resist  the  force  of 
the  arguments  with  which  that  position  has  been 
assailed,  and  have  placed  it  in  A.n.  150  or  155,  and 
even  as  early  as  A.D.  130. 

Assume  that  it  was  written  in  A.D.  130.     Irena:us 


254  rOLYCARP. 


could  hardly  have  been  a  hearer  of  Polycarp  earlier 
than  A.D.  135  ;  he  may  have  heard  him  as  late  as 
A.D.  150,  but  the  more  probable  date  is  A.D.  145. 
For  reasons  which  have  been  stated  earlier  in  this 
Lecture,  it  seems  to  me  certain  that  if  a  Gospel  had 
already  appeared  attributed  to  John,  but  containing 
a  representation  of  our  Lord  and  of  His  ministry 
different  from  that  which  John  had  been  accustomed 
to  give  in  his  oral  teaching,  Polycarp  would  have 
denounced  it  vehemently.  If  it  appeared  as  early 
as  A.D.  130,  h'enaius  would  have  heard  him  denounce 
it.  How  could  Polycarp  have  spoken  of  what  he  had 
heard  from  John  about  our  Lord's  miracles  and  teach- 
ing, without  warning  his  hearers  against  the  fictitious 
Gospel,  claiming  to  be  John's,  which  contained  stories 
of  miracles  of  which  John  had  never  spoken  and  dis- 
courses of  our  Lord  wholly  different  in  their  sub- 
stance and  their  form  from  those  which  John  had 
been  accustomed  to  repeat  ? 

But  assume  that  it  was  written  after  IrenKus  had 
ceased  to  be  a  hearer  of  Polycarp.  This  does  not 
lessen  the  real  force  of  the  testimony  of  Iren?eus,  if 
the  Gospel  appeared  at  any  time  before  Polycarp's 
mart}'rdom  in  A.D.  155  or  156.  For  Irena:us  was  not 
the  last  of  Polycarp's  hearers,  and  even  after  he  had 
gone  to  L}'ons,  the  relations  between  southern  Gaul 
and  Asia  Minor  were  so  intimate,  that  if  Polycarp  had 
declared  that  the  new  Gospel  could  not  have  been 
John's,  Irenxus  would  have  been  sure  to  hear  of  it. 

Assume — though  this  is  becoming  impossible — that 


rOLYCARP.  265 


the  Fourth  Gospel  appeared  after  the  death  of  Poly- 
carp.  Even  this  does  not  destroy  the  value  of  the 
testimony  of  Irena:us.  That  Ircnajus  believed  that 
our  Fourth  Gospel  was  written  by  the  Apostle  John 
is  certain  ;  there  is  no  hint  or  trace  in  his  writings 
that  he  had  ever  doubted  it.  But  he  had  heard 
Polycarp  describe  his  intercourse  with  John  and  with 
the  rest  who  had  seen  the  Lord  ;  he  had  heard  him 
relate  their  words.  "  And  whatsoever  things  he  had 
heard  from  them  about  the  Lord  and  about  His 
miracles  and  about  His  teaching;  Polycarp,  as  ha\-ing 
received  them  from  eye-witnesses  of  the  life  of  the 
Word,  would  relate  altogether  in  accordance  with  the 
Scriptures."  Polycarp's  recollections  of  what  he  had 
heard  from  John  and  the  rest  were  "  altogether  in 
accordance  with  the  Scriptures^'  and  among  these 
Scriptures  Irenaeus  placed  our  Fourth  Gospel.  The 
vivid  contrasts,  the  profound  differences,  between  the 
Fourth  Gospel  and  the  first  three  give  to  this  testi- 
mony immense  weight.  In  Polycarp's  recollections 
of  John's  teaching  there  must  have  been  the  same 
representation  of  our  Lord  as  that  which  is  contained 
in  John's  Gospel. 

vr. 

John,  Polycarp,  Irenreus, — these  three,  it  has  been 
well  said,  are  inseparable,  so  inseparable  as  to  con- 
stitute an  indestructible  argument  for  the  liistorical 
trustworthiness  and  the  genuineness  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.      But   in    these    inquiries,  carried  on    in    the 


266  POLYCARr. 

silence  and  loneliness  of  libraries,  we  too  easily  forget 
that  when  the  ancient  books  were  written  which  we 
are  reading  in  order  to  find  traces  of  the  existence  and 
authority  of  our  Gospels,  there  were  thousands  and 
tens  of  thousands  of  living  men  who  could  have  told 
us  very  much  more  about  what  we  want  to  know 
than  we  can  learn  by  the  most  patient  examination  of 
these  ancient  writings.  We  unconsciously  lapse  into 
the  habit  of  thinking  that  the  historical  trustworthi- 
ness of  the  story  of  Christ  is  built  upon  the  scattered 
sentences  which  can  be  quoted  from  the  writings  of 
less  than  a  score  of  ancient  authors.  The  supports 
seem  unequal  to  the  weight  which  is  placed  upon 
them.  But  these  scattered  sentences  which  can  be 
quoted  are  but  hints  and  suggestions  of  the  real 
argument,  which  is  to  be  found,  not  in  books,  but  in 
what  must  have  been  in  the  knowledge  and  faith  of 
thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  of  living  men  and 
women. 

Take,  for  example,  the  testimony  of  Irena^us  about 
Polycarp,  on  which  I  have  been  saying  so  much  in 
this  Lecture.  An  extract,  preserved  by  an  ecclesias- 
tical historian  living  in  Cxsarea  in  the  fourth  century, 
from  a  letter  written  by  a  Christian  bishop  li\'ing  in 
Lyons  in  the  second  century,  seems  a  very  slender 
thread  on  which  to  hang  a  conclusion  of  such 
immense  importance  as  the  genuineness  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  But  Irena^us  and  Pol)xarp  represent  an 
immense  number  of  Christian  people  who  were  living 
in  those  times  in  many  parts  of  the  world. 


rOLYCARP.  267 


Polycarp  was  not  the  only  man  who  heard  about 
the  miracles  and  the  teaching  of  Christ  from  the 
Apostle  John.  John  died  about  A.D.  100 ;  twenty, 
thirty,  forty  years  later  there  were  men  still  living, 
ministers  of  Churches,  members  of  Churches,  who 
could  remember  John  and  "  the  rest  who  had  seen 
the  Lord  "  just  as  distinctly  as  he  could.  Of  this 
great  company  Polycarp  is  the  representative.  Their 
names  are  lost;  but  in  their  day  they  were  loyal  to 
Christ,  and  contended  earnestly  for  the  faith  w^hich 
was  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints.  While  they 
lived  they  shared  with  Polycarp  the  defence  of  that 
conception  of  Christ  and  of  that  account  of  His 
ministry  which  they  had  received  from  John  and 
other  friends  of  our  Lord. 

From  this  generation,  consisting  of  the  friends  and 
immediate  disciples  of  John  and  of  the  rest  who  had 
seen  Christ,  the  story  of  what  our  Lord  had  done 
and  taught  was  transmitted  to  a  still  greater  number 
of  devout  men,  some  of  whom — many  of  whom — 
endured  torture  and  died  cruel  deaths  rather  than 
deny  Christ.  This  generation  is  represented  by 
Irennjus.  In  A.D.  185,  the  year  in  which  he  published 
his  work.  Against  Heretics,  the  1-^ourth  Gospel  had 
already  secured  its  great  and  authoritative  position  ; 
and  it  was  universally  attributed  to  the  Apostle  John. 
But  in  that  year  there  could  hardly  have  been  a  con- 
siderable Church  in  Asia  ]\Iinor  in  which  there  were 
not  many  men  and  women  who  might  have  used  his 
own  words,  and   said   that  th<y  could  "  describe  the 


26S  rOL  YCARP. 


very  place  in  which  the  blessed  Polycarp  " — or  some 
other  friend  of  John — "used  to  sit  \\\\q.w  he  dis- 
coursed, and  his  manner  of  life,  and  his  personal 
appearance,  and  the  discourses  which  he  held  before 
the  people,  and  how  he  would  describe  his  intercourse 
with  John  and  with  the  rest  who  had  seen  the  Lord, 
and  how  he  would  relate  their  words.  And  whatso- 
ever he  had  heard  from  them  about  the  Lord,  and 
about  His  miracles,  and  about  His  teaching,"  he, 
the  friend  and  disciple  of  John,  "  as  having  received 
them  from  eye-witnesses  of  the  life  of  the  Word, 
would  relate  altogether  in  accordance  with  the 
Scriptures."  It  is  impossible  that  these  men  would 
have  received  the  Fourth  Gospel  as  the  Gospel  of 
John,  that  they  would  have  allowed  the  Church  to 
receive  it,  if  its  account  of  Christ,  His  miracles.  His 
teaching,  His  personal  greatness  and  glory,  had  not 
been  identical  in  substance  with  that  which  they 
themselves  had  heard  from  John's  personal  friends 
and  immediate  disciples. 


LECTURE    XIV. 

RE  VIE  IV   OF    THE    ARGUMENT. 

IN  bringing  this  course  of  Lectures  to  a  close,  I 
invite  you  to  recall  the  ground  over  which  we 
have  travelled  together,  and  to  review  the  main  posi- 
tions which  I  have  endeavoured  to  establish. 

I. 

We  began  by  inquiring  why  it  is  that  the  faith  of 
the  great  majority  of  Christian  people  has  not  been 
shaken  by  the  varied,  incessant,  and  formidable 
assaults  which  in  our  time  have  been  made  upon  the 
Jewish  and  the  Christian  Scriptures.  It  is  commonly 
assumed  that  these  ancient  books  are  the  very  foun- 
dation of  our  faith  in  Christ,  and  that  while  their 
genuineness,  their  historical  trustworthiness,  and  their 
inspiration  are  uncertain,  faith  is  impossible.  But 
during  the  last  thirty  or  forty  years  it  has  come  to 
be  generally  known  that  there  are  grave  controversies 
concerning  a  large  number  of  the  books  contaiiiod 
both  in  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New ;  that  men 
of  great  learning  are  of  o[)inion  that  even  the  Four 
Gospels  were  not  written  by  Matthew,  Mark,   Luke, 


270  REVlEiV  OF   THE  ARGUMENT. 

and  John,  but  by  unknown  authors,  who  constructed 
their  story  from  the  untrustworthy  traditions  of  a 
later  generation,  or  who  dehbcratcly  wrote  fictitious 
narratives  in  the  interest  of  conflicting  "tendencies  " 
in  the  Church,  tendencies  which  were  at  last  recon- 
ciled by  mutual  concessions  and  compromises  towards 
the  close  of  the  second  century.  While  these  con- 
troversies are  undetermined,  and  the  authority  of 
great  scholars  can  be  appealed  to  on  both  sides,  how 
is  it  possible  for  ordinary  Christian  people  who  know 
anything  of  the  seriousness  of  the  subjects  in  debate 
and  the  severity  of  the  conflict  to  continue  to  believe 
in  Christ? 

My  first  answer  to  the  question  was  this  :  That 
whatever  may  have  been  the  original  grounds  of 
their  faith,  their  faith  has  been  verified  in  their  own 
personal  experience.  They  trusted  in  Christ  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  and  they  have  been  liberated  from 
the  sense  of  guilt  ;  for  deliverance  from  sin  and  the 
chains  of  evil  habits  have  been  broken  or  loosened, 
and  the  fires  of  evil  passion  have  been  quenched  or 
subdued.  They  trusted  in  Christ  for  a  firmer  strength 
to  resist  temptation  and  to  live  righteously,  and  the 
strength  has  come.  They  have  received  from  Him 
— they  are  sure  of  it — a  new  life,  a  life  akin  to  the 
life  of  God.  They  have  been  drawn  into  a  wonderful 
personal  union  with  Christ  llim.self;  "in  Christ" 
they  have  found  God,  and  have  passed  into  that 
invisible  and  eternal  order  which  is  described  as  "  the 
kingdom  of  God."    Whatever  uncertainties  there  may 


REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT. 


be  about  the  historical  worth  of  the  four  narratives 
which  profess  to  tell  the  story  of  Christ's  earthly 
ministry,  their  faith  in  Him  is  firm,  because  they 
know  by  their  own  experience  that  the  Living  Christ 
is  the  Lord  and  Saviour  of  men. 

My  second  answer  to  the  question  was  this  :  That 
there  are  Christian  men  who  would  say  that  the 
representation  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  the  Four 
Gospels  appeals,  and  appeals  immediately,  to  all 
those  elements  and  powers  of  life  that  give  answer  to 
manifestations  of  the  presence  of  God.  They  belie\e 
in  Christ  because  they  see  God  in  Him.  They  do 
not  ask  for  proofs  that  He  wrought  miracles  ;  He 
Himself  is  the  great  Miracle  ;  He  transcends  all 
the  miracles  attributed  to  Him  by  the  evangelists. 
Discussions  about  the  age  in  which  the  Gospels  were 
written  and  about  their  authorship  are  of  secondary 
interest ;  if  they  were  written  by  unknown  men  who 
belonged  to  the  second,  the  third,  or  even  the  fourth 
generation  of  Christians,  they  preserve  the  substance 
and  give  a  true  account  of  His  earthly  history.  The 
story  they  tell  is  no  involuntary  creation  of  passionate 
love ;  much  less  is  it  a  deliberate  invention.  The  life 
of  the  Eternal  God  is  in  it. 

For  these  two  reasons,  critical  and  historical  con- 
troversies do  not  destroy  faith. 

n. 

This  discussion  reminds  me  of  a  passage  in  a 
book    by    Mr.  Francis    Newman   which   had   a  great 


REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 


popularity  forty  years  ago,  though  I  suppose  that 
it  is  now  ahnost  forgotten.  The  book  assailed  the 
dearest  traditions  of  the  orthodox  and  evangelical 
Churches,  and  yet  there  were  devout  Christians  who 
found  in  it  very  much  that  seemed  true  and  cdif)'ing. 
The  passage  of  which  I  am  reminded  is  rather  long, 
but  I  will  quote  it,  for  I  think  that  it  will  assist  me 
to  make  clearer  and  more  definite  one  or  two  of 
the  principal  positions  which  I  have  endeavoured  to 
make  good  in  these  Lectures. 
Mr.  Newman  says  : 

"  If  we  form  an  a  priori  conception  of  the  genuine  champion 
of  the  Gospel  from  the  New  Testament,  we  shall  say,  that  he 
is  girt  with  the  only  sword  of  the  Spirit,  the  living  word  of  God, 
which  pierces  to  the  dividing  asunder  of  soul  and  spirit,  joints 
and  marrow,  and  is  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and  intents  of 
the  heart.  In  his  hands  it  is  as  lightning  from  God,  kindled 
from  the  spirit  within  him,  and  piercing  through  the  unbeliever's 
soul,  convincing  his  conscience  of  sin  and  striking  him  to  the 
ground  before  God  ;  until  those  who  believe  receive  it,  not  as 
the  word  of  man,  but  as,  what  it  is  in  truth,  the  word  of  God. 
Its  action  is  directly  upon  the  conscience  and  upon  the  soul; 
and  hence  its  wonderful  efficacy;  not  upon  the  critical  faculties, 
upon  which  the  Spirit  is  powerless.  Such  at  least  was  Paul's 
weapon  for  fighting  the  Lord's  battles.  But  -li^/tcn  //le  tncdcrn 
b ilUe  commences,^  what  do  we  sec?  A  study  table  spread  over 
wiili  books  in  various  languages  ;  a  learned  man  dealing  with 
liistoiical  and  literary  questions  ;  referring  to  Tacitus  and 
IMiny  ;  engaged  in  establishing  that  Joscplius  is  a  credible 
and  not  a  credulous  writer  ;  inquiring  whether  the  Greek  of 
the  Apocalypse  and  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  can  have  come  from 
the  same  hand  ;  searching  through  Justin  Martyr  and  Irenccus, 

'  These  italics  are  my  own. — R.  W.  D. 


REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  273 

in  ofder  to  find  out  whether  the  Gospels  are  a  growth  by 
accretion  or  modification,  or  were  originally  struck  off  as  we 
now  read  them;  comparing  Philo  or  Plotinus  with  John  and 
Paul  :  in  short,  we  find  him  engaged  (with  much  or  little 
success)  in  praiseworthy  efforts  at  Local  History,  Criticism  of 
Texts,  History  of  Philosophy,  Logic  (or  the  Theory  of  Evi- 
dence), Physiology,  Demonology,  and  other  important  but  very 
difficult  studies  ;  all  inappreciable  to  the  unlearned,  all  remote 
from  the  sphere  in  which  the  Soul  operates."  ' 

When  I  first  read  that  passage  I  was  a  very  young 
man,  and  it  made  a  deep  impression  on  me.  I  could 
not  shake  it  off.  It  perplexed  me.  In  those  days, 
though  I  had  come  to  see  that  the  Gospel  of  Christ 
is  a  direct  appeal  from  God  to  what  is  deepest  and 
most  central  in  the  life  of  man,  my  thought  had  not 
worked  itself  clear  from  the  assumption  that  faith 
demands  for  its  very  existence  adequate  guarantees 
of  the  genuineness  and  authenticity  of  the  Four  Gos- 
pels. If  I  recall  accurately  my  position  at  that  time, 
I  thought  that  all  the  other  books,  both  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New,  might  be  submerged  under 
"sunless  seas  of  doubt,"  and  Christian  faith  remain, 
but  that  if  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the 
Gospels  was  lost,  all  was  lost.  And  yet,  if  their 
authenticity  was  challenged,  this  criticism  of  texts, 
this  history  of  philosophy,  this  discussion  of  the 
theory  of  evidence,  this  laborious  search  through 
Justin  IMartyr  and  Irenajus,  this  comparison  of  Philo 
and  Plotinus  with  John  and  Paul,  studies  which,  as 

'  Francis  William  Newman  :  The  Soul :  ils  Sono-^'s  and 
its  Aspirations  (fourth  edition),  p.  151. 


REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 


I\Ir.  Ncwinan  sa)'s,  arc  "all  inappreciable  to  the  un- 
learned, all  remote  from  the  sphere  in  which  the  soul 
operates,"  were  necessary.  Mr.  Newman  seemed  to 
me  wholly  in  the  right  when  he  insisted  that  the 
power  of  the  true  preacher  of  the  Christian  Gospel  is 
the  power  of  the  truth  and  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  and 
yet  it  seemed  that  the  preacher  could  do  nothing  until 
scholars,  working  through  long  and  laborious  years, 
in  many  difficult  and  obscure  provinces  of  learning, 
had  demonstrated  the  authenticity  and  genuineness 
of  four  ancient  books.  It  looked  as  if  critics  must 
settle  their  differences  before  preachers  could  bring 
home  to  men  the  reality  and  glory  of  the  Christian 
redemption. 

But  what  are  the  facts  ?  Has  the  Christian 
preacher  ever  been  compelled  to  be  silent  until  the 
controversies  of  scholars  were  closed  ?  Has  he  ever 
had  to  rely  on  the  authority  of  scholars  for  the  sub- 
stance of  the  Gospel  of  Christ?  Has  he  ever  been 
uncertain  about  it,  because  there  were  learned  ques- 
tions on  which  scholars  were  not  agreed  ?  How  was 
it  with  the  original  apostles  ?  They  had  known 
Christ  for  themselves  during  His  earthly  ministry, 
and  they  had  seen  Him  and  listened  to  Him  after  He 
had  risen  from  the  dead.  They  knew  that  He  was 
near  them  still,  and  that  in  His  power  and  grace  they 
had  passed  into  the  light  of  God.  What  they  had 
to  tell  men  about  the  great  things  which  Christ  had 
done  and  taught  while  He  was  visibly  present  in  the 
world,  and  about  the  greater  things  which  He  was 


REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT.  275 

still  doing,  came  from  their  own  personal  knowledge  ; 
it  required  no  authentication  from  the  rabbis  of  the 
Jews  or  from  the  philosophers  of  the  Greeks. 

How  was  it  with  their  immediate  successors,  the 
preachers  of  the  second  generation  of  Christians  ? 
They  had  been  taught  the  Christian  Gospel  by  the 
apostles  and  disciples  of  our  Lord  ;  but  that  Gospel 
had  been  verified  in  their  own  experience.  They 
too  knew  Christ  for  themselves — the  risen,  the  glori- 
fied Christ.  They  had  received  from  Him  the  remis- 
sion of  sins  and  the  gift  of  the  Divine  life.  They 
knew  the  m\'stcry  and  the  blessedness  of  translation 
into  the  kingdom  of  God's  dear  Son.  They  spoke  to 
Christ,  and  He  answered  them.  Through  Him  they 
had  found  God.  The  greatest  things  about  which 
they  preached  were  things  which  had  passed  into 
their  own  experience.  They  were  not  mere  guardians 
of  a  tradition,  but  spoke  as  iviinesscs,  and  told  men 
what  they  themselves  had  seen  and  heard  of  Christ, 
the  Lord  and  Saviour  of  men. 

It  is  true  that  for  their  knowledge  of  what  our 
Lord  had  done  and  taught  in  Jerusalem  and  Galilee 
they  had  to  depend  on  those  who  had  known  Christ 
"  after  the  flesh  "  ;  but  there  were  some  passages  of 
the  story  which  commanded  their  faith,  even  apart 
from  their  confidence  in  the  accuracy  of  the  recollec- 
tion and  the  personal  trustworthiness  of  the  men  by 
whom  the  story  was  told — passages  \\hich  shone  in 
their  own  light,  words  which  had  a  Divine  accent  and 
a  Divine  power      It   was  the  same  when  the  story 


276  REVIEW  OF   THE   ARGUMENT. 

was  fixed  in  the  Gospels.  The  story  rested  on  the 
authority  of  the  original  apostles  of  our  Lord  ;  it  was 
the  story  which  the  apostles  had  told  ;  and  yet  there 
were  parts  of  it  which,  in  a  very  true  sense,  were 
independent  of  apostolic  testimony,  and  made  an  irre- 
sistible appeal  to  the  faith  of  every  man  that  knew 
for  himself  the  glorified  Christ,  and  had  received 
the  illumination  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 

The  same  conditions  were  repeated  in  the  life  and 
preaching  of  the  third  generation  of  Christians  and 
the  fourth.  And  in  every  new  generation,  from  the 
time  of  the  apostles  to  our  own,  the  substance  of  the 
Christian  Gospel  has  been  verified  afresh  in  the  ex- 
perience of  penitents  and  saints.  The  true  preachers 
of  every  new  generation  have  been  new  and  inde- 
pendent witnesses  to  the  power,  the  grace,  the  glory 
of  the  Redeemer  of  men.  They  have  spoken  on  the 
strength  of  their  own  knowledge.  Even  those  of 
them  who  had  the  greatest  reverence  for  tradition  and 
authority  would  have  been  powerless,  but  for  their 
direct  vision  of  Christ,  and  their  personal  conscious- 
ness of  the  reality  and  greatness  of  the  Christian 
redemption.  Speaking  broadly  and  generally,  the 
actual  experience  of  one  generation  creates,  under 
God,  the  faith  of  the  next.  You  and  I  received  the 
Christian  Gospel  because  men  whom  we  knew  and 
who  spoke  to  us  about  Christ  were  vividly  conscious 
that  they  had  found  redemption  in  Him  ;  and  we 
ourselves  must  have  a  vivid  consciousness  of  redemp- 
tion in  Him  if  we  are  to  transmit  the  Christian  Faith 


REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT.  277 

to  those  who  will  come  after  us.  The  Divine  fire 
passes  from  hand  to  hand,  from  living  men  to  living 
men.  This  is  the  general  law.  It  has  rarely  to  be 
rekindled  from  the  torches  of  an  earlier  age. 

The  books  which  record  the  earthly  life  of  our 
Lord — a  treasure  of  infinite  worth  to  the  Church  and 
the  human  race — have  been  held  sacred,  partly  be- 
cause the  tradition  has  been  transmitted  from  gene- 
ration to  generation  that  they  contain  the  story  of  our 
Lord  which  was  told  by  His  original  apostles,  partly 
because  very  much  of  the  story  has  in  it  a  certain 
wonderful  power  which  commands  faith  and  exerts  a 
gracious  but  regal  authority  over  the  central  elements 
of  the  spiritual  life. 

But  what  is  to  happen  when  their  historical  trust- 
worthiness is  assailed  by  scholars,  who  use  all  the 
resources  of  ingenuity  and  learning  to  destroy  their 
authority?  What  is  to  happen  when  it  is  alleged 
that  there  is  no  decisive  proof  that  all  the  Four  were 
in  existence  before  the  later  years  of  the  second 
century ;  that  the  sayings  of  our  Lord,  as  quoted 
by  earlier  Christian  writers,  vary  so  much  from  His 
sayings  as  given  in  our  Gospels,  that  the  quotations 
must  have  been  derived  from  narratives  which  have 
wholly  disappeared  ;  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  differs 
so  widely  in  style  from  the  Apocalypse  that  both 
books  cannot  have  been  written  by  the  same  author, 
and  differs  so  much  from  the  first  three,  that  if  tJiey 
are  historically  trustworthy,  it  must  be  a  theological 
fiction  ? 


2 78  REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT. 

Those  wlio  believe  that  the  story  of  Christ  which 
was  received  by  the  Church  from  the  apostles  has 
been  held  fast  ever  since  have  no  choice.  They  are 
compelled  by  the  assailants  to  discuss  questions  of 
literature  and  history. 

It  is  an  error  to  say  that,  "when  the  modern  battle 
couinieiiccs" — to  use  Mr.  Newman's  phrase — it  is  the 
man  who  ought  to  be  girt  with  "  the  sword  of  the 
Spirit "  that  is  sitting  at  a  study  table,  spread  over 
with  books  in  various  languages,  Tacitus  and  Pliny, 
Plotinus  and  Philo,  Justin  Martyr,  Ircnacus,  and  the 
rest.  When  the  battle  '' coinine?ices"  it  is  quite 
another  man  that  is  sitting  there  :  not  the  preacher, 
but  the  critic,  who  denies  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
walked  on  the  sea,  cooled  the  fires  of  fever,  gave 
sight  to  the  blind,  hearing  to  the  deaf,  speech  to  the 
dumb,  and  raised  the  dead  ;  the  critic,  who  denies 
that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  after  dying  for  the  sins  of 
men,  rose  again  the  third  day,  and  appeared  to  the 
disciples  ;  the  critic,  who,  since  he  denies  the  truth 
of  the  story  told  in  the  h^our  Gospels,  is  endeavouring 
to  show  that  we  have  no  proof  that  this  was  the  story 
which  was  told  by  the  men  who  knew  Christ,  and 
that  the  books  are  by  unknown  authors  belonging 
to  a  later  generation.  It  is  the  hostile  critic,  not  the 
Christian  preacher,  who  is  responsible  for  beginning, 
and  continually  renewing,  the  "  modern  battle,"  on 
fields  which  are  so  remote  from  the  spiritual  life  of  man. 

When  once  they  have  been  raised,  the  literary  and 
historical  questions  at  issue  must  be  determined  by 


REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT.  279 

literary  and  historical  considerations.  But  I  endea- 
voured to  show,  in  the  earlier  Lectures  of  this  course, 
that  the  controversy  does  not  touch  the  faith  of 
Christian  men  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Lord 
and  Saviour  of  the  human  race,  the  Root  of  the 
Divine  life  in  man,  the  Way  to  God.  This  faith  does 
not  ask  for  the  protection  of  friendly  scholarship ; 
and  the  assaults  of  hostile  scholarship  cannot  reach 
it.  It  needs  neither  Tacitus  nor  Pliny,  neither  Philo 
nor  Plotinus,  neither  Justin  Martyr  nor  Irenseus.  It 
is  in  actual  possession  of  the  salvation  which  Christ 
has  achicN'cd  for  mankind. 

But  though  faith  in  Christ  is  not  imperilled  by  the 
literary  and  historical  controversy,  the  controversy 
is  a  grave  one ;  and  in  repelling  the  assaults  of  hos- 
tile criticism  the  Christian  apologist  discharges  an 
honourable  service.  It  is  for  him  to  show  that  the 
story  of  our  Lord's  earthly  history,  which  has  been 
the  consolation,  the  support,  the  light,  the  joy  of 
countless  milHons  of  men,  has  attracted  their  love, 
their  wonder,  and  their  awe,  has  revealed  to  them 
the  loftiest  ideal  of  human  goodness,  and  exalted 
their  conception  of  the  righteousness  and  grace  and 
pity  of  God,  is  not  the  mere  dream  of  a  fervent 
enthusiasm,  or  the  deliberate  invention  of  a  daring 
imagination,  but  the  story  which  was  told  by  the 
elect  friends  of  Christ,  whom  He  trusted  to  make 
His  Gospel  known  to  all  nations,  and  that  it  was 
after  this  manner  that  the  Son  of  the  Eternal  lived 
amonsr  men. 


2So  REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

III. 

Ill  the  later  Lectures  I  have  laid  before  }-ou  some 
of  the  proofs  on  which  Christian  apologists  rely  for 
defence  of  this  position.  Those  which  I  have  sub- 
mitted have  been  nearly  all  of  one  kind.  There  are 
lines  of  argument  of  a  different  description.  But 
some  of  these  can  hardly  be  made  intelligible  except 
to  persons  of  considerable  scholarship.  Others — 
such,  for  example,  as  that  which  finds  in  the  contents 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  evidence  that  it  was  written  by 
the  Apostle  John— can  be  best  examined  in  books  ; 
that  argument  is  full  of  interest ;  but  I  did  not  feel 
that  I  had  the  skill  to  deal  effectively,  before  a  popu- 
lar audience,  with  all  the  details  which  must  have  a 
place  in  any  adequate  statement  of  it.  Nor  have  I 
exhausted  the  particular  argument  which  I  have 
endeavoured  to  illustrate ;  other  quotations  from 
other  Christian  writers  can  be  alleged  to  corroborate 
it.  But,  in  my  own  judgment,  what  I  have  said  is 
sufficient,  and  more  than  sufticient,  for  its  purpose. 

I  began  by  reminding  you  that,  at  the  close  of  the 
second  century,  the  story  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
contained  in  our  Four  Gospels  was  received  as 
authentic  by  Christian  Churches  throughout  the 
world,  that  the  books  themselves  were  reverenced  as 
sacred  Scriptures,  and  that  it  was  universally  believed 
that  they  were  written  by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and 
John. 

In  A.D.   185,   Irciueus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  who  had 


REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT.  2S1 

spent  his  early  years  in  Asia  ]\linor,  and  who,  about 
ten  years  before,  had  been  sent  on  an  important 
mission  to  Rome,  wrote  of  the  Four  Gospels  in  a  way 
which  shows  that  they  had  been  used  by  the  Church 
so  long,  and  held  so  high  a  place  in  the  religious  life 
of  Christian  people,  that  even  the  number  of  the 
Gospels  was  supposed  to  have  mystical  meanings. 

That  was  about  eighty-five  years  after  the  death  of 
the  Apostle  John.  Now  it  is  not  easy  to  believe  that 
w^hile  John  was  living,  and  while  other  men  were 
living  who  had  known  our  Lord,  spurious  Gospels, 
containing  untrustworthy  accounts  of  what  our  Lord 
said  and  did,  would  have  been  received  by  the  Church 
as  having  been  written  by  John  himself,  by  Matthew 
his  brother  apostle,  by  Mark  and  Luke,  who  were 
friends  of  Peter  and  Paul.  If  therefore  it  can  be 
made  clear  that  the  Gospels — which  are  our  Gospels 
— received  and  reverenced  by  Irenreus  in  A.D.  185 
were  not  written  after  John's  death,  about  A.D.  100, 
the  main  contention  of  these  Lectures  is  established. 
The  interval  to  be  bridged  is  about  eighty-five 
years  ;  and  the  question  to  be  determined  is  whether 
it  is  probable,  whether  it  is  possible,  that  at  the  end 
of  that  period  Christian  Churches  all  over  the  world 
would  have  received  the  Four  Gospels  as  containing 
the  original,  authentic,  apostolic  story  of  Christ,  if 
these  Gospels  had  not  been  generally  accepted  by 
Christian  Churches  when  the  period  began. 

Eighty-five  years  : — it  seems  a  long  time  ;  but  it  is 
exactly  the  time  since  my  predecessor  in  the  pastorate 


282  REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

of  this  Church  came  to  Birmingham.  He  began  his 
ministry  in  Carrs  Lane  in  the  early  autumn  of  A.D. 
1805.  This  morning  I  am  separated  by  as  many 
years  from  the  commencement  of  Mr.  James's  minis- 
try in  this  congregation  as  separated  Irenaeus,  when 
he  wrote  his  book  Against  Heresies^  from  the  death  of 
the  Apostle  John.  That  may  help  you  to  appreciate 
the  strength  of  the  argument  which  rests  on  the  recep- 
tion of  the  Gospels  in  the  time  of  Irenaeus.  During 
the  si.x  years  that  I  spent  at  Spring  Hill  College, 
between  the  summer  of  1847  and  the  summer  of  1853, 
I  was  frequently  the  guest  of  Mr.  James.  It  was  his 
custom  to  invite  two  or  three  of  the  students  to  din- 
ner on  Saturday  afternoon  ;  and  he  used  to  talk  to  us 
about  the  work  for  which  we  were  being  prepared, 
and  about  his  own  ministry,  and  about  the  preachers 
who  were  famous  early  in  the  century.  In  the  sum- 
mer of  1853  I  became  his  assistant,  in  the  summer  of 
1854  his  colleague;  and  I  was  his  colleague  till  his 
death  in  the  autumn  of  1859.  During  this  second 
period  of  six  }'cars  I  was,  of  course,  more  intimately 
associated  with  him.  We  talked  together  about  many 
things  :  about  the  history  of  this  congregation  ;  about 
the  changes  which  had  passed  upon  his  own  theolo- 
gical opinions  since  his  ministry  began  ;  about  other 
Congregational  Churches  in  this  city  and  in  other  parts 
of  England  ;  about  his  early  friends  in  the  ministry  ; 
about  sermons  and  speeches  which  he  had  heard  from 
men  who  had  long  been  dead. 

I  have  known,  of  course,  a  great  deal   about  you 


REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  283 

and  your  fathers  since  1853,  when  I  began  my  minis- 
try here,  and  I  have  known  about  all  the  principal 
events  in  the  history  of  the  Congregational  Churches 
of  England  since  then  ;  but  from  my  association  with 
Mr.  James,  my  memory,  both  of  yourselves  and  of 
English  Congregationalism,  may  be  said  to  extend 
over  the  whole  eighty-five  years  between  this  morn- 
ing and  that  Sunday  in  September,  1805,  when  he 
preached  his  first  sermon  as  your  minister  ;  whatever 
important  events  in  your  history  or  the  history  of 
English  Congregationalism  happened  between  the 
beginning  of  his  ministry  and  the  beginning  of  mine 
I  came  to  know  through  him. 

For  example,  it  would  be  impossible  for  me  to  sup- 
pose that  this  chapel — meeting-house  was  the  older  and 
better  name  for  it — was  in  existence  when  he  came  to 
Birmingham  ;  for  he  used  to  talk  to  me  about  the  old 
chapel  which  formerly  stood  on  this  site,  about  how 
the  new  chapel  came  to  be  built,  and  about  things 
that  happened  in  connexion  with  the  opening.  It 
would  be  equally  impossible  for  mc  to  commit  the 
error  of  supposing  that  the  Congregational  Union  of 
England  and  Wales  is  a  venerable  institution,  founded 
by  the  Congregationalists  of  a  century  or  a  century 
and  a  half  ago.  I  have  what  may  be  called  a  "second- 
hand recollection "  of  its  formation  early  in  the 
"  thirties "  of  the  present  century,  rather  less  than 
si.xty  years  ago.  He  used  to  talk  to  mc  about  its 
formation  ;  about  the  distrust  with  which  it  was 
regarded  by  some  stanch  Independents  ;   about    the 


2S4  REVIEW  OF   'I HE  ARGUMENT. 

drawing  up  of  the  "  Declaration  of  Faith  and  Order" 
by  Dr.  Redford,  of  Worcester,  and  himself,  Dr.  Red- 
ford  doing  the  larger  share  of  the  work  ;  about  its 
first  secretary,  Mr.  Algernon  Wells  ;  about  the  small- 
ness  of  the  numbers  that  were  present  at  the  early 
meetings  ;  and  about  the  brevity  of  the  "  addresses  " 
of  the  early  chairmen. 

And  so  a  large  number  of  men  living  in  the  time 
of  Irena:us,  A.D.  185,  could  themselves  remember  the 
principal  events  in  the  history  of  their  own  Churches 
and  of  many  other  Churches  during  the  preceding 
thirty-five  }-cars ;  ^  and  many  of  them  may  have 
known — some  of  them  must  have  known — men  whose 
recollections  travelled  back  to  the  very  beginning  of 
the  century.  If  the  Gospels  which  ^^■ere  received  by 
the  Church  at  the  beginning  of  the  century — during 
the  first  ten,  twenty,  thirty,  forty,  fifty  years  of  it — 
Gospels  which  the  Church  believed  were  written  by 
apostles, — if,  I  say,  these  Gospels  had  disappeared, 
and  other  Gospels  had  taken  their  place — taken 
their  place  in  Carthage,  Alexandria,  Rome,  Cassarea, 
Smyrna,  Ephesus,  and  Lyons — Irenaeus  and  his  con- 
temporaries must  have  known  it  ;  and  it  would  have 
been  impossible  for  the  new  Gospels  to  have  drawn 
to  themselves,  in  the  year  A.D.  185,  universal  venera- 


'  My  own  memory  as  minister  of  Carrs  Lane  congregation 
extends  over  thirty-seven  years,  as  my  ministry  commenced  in 
1853  ;  but  I  could  claim  a  large  knowledge,  both  of  Carrs  Lane 
congregation  and  of  Congregationalism  during  the  six  years 
between  1847  and  1853. 


REVIEW  OF   THE  ARGUMENT.  2S5 

tion  as  narratives  of  our  Lord's  ministry  which 
had  been  received  by  the  Church  from  the  hands 
of  apostles  and  their  immediate  disciples. 

Take  the  Gospel  of  John.  Irenseus  had  heard 
Polycarp  describe  his  intercourse  with  John  and  the 
rest  who  had  seen  the  Lord  ;  this  must  have  been 
long  after  John's  death,  perhaps  as  late  as  A.D.  145, 
or  even  A.D.  150,  for  Iren?eus  lived  into  the  third 
century.  Was  the  Fourth  Gospel  published  before 
that  time  ?  Then  Polycarp  must  have  spoken  of  it  ; 
if  John  had  not  written  it,  Polycarp  would  have 
denied  that  it  was  genuine  ;  and  Irenseus,  who  re- 
verenced Polycarp,  would  never  have  received  it. 
But  if  it  was  not  published  before  that  time,  if  it 
was  unknown  to  John's  friend  and  disciple  forty  or 
fifty  years  after  John's  death,  then,  again,  it  is  in- 
credible that  Irenseus  should  have  received  it. 

Polycarp's  martyrdom  was  in  the  year  A.U.  I5S  ^"^ 
A.D.  156.  He  had  known  John  ;  and  for  more  than 
fifty  years  after  the  death  of  John  he  was  one  of  the 
trustees  and  guardians  of  John's  memory.  During  a 
great  part  of  that  time  he  was  the  most  conspicuous 
personage  among  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor.  Nor 
did  he  stand  alone.  He  lived  to  such  an  advanced 
age,  that  he  probably  survived  all  the  men  who  had 
listened  with  him  to  John's  teaching  ;  but  for  thirty 
or  forty  years  after  John's  death  there  must  have 
been  a  large  number  of  other  persons  who  would 
have  associated  themselves  with  him  in  rejecting  a 
Gospel  which  falsely  claimed  John's  authority.    While 


2S6  REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

these  persons  lived,  such  a  Gospel  would  have  had 
no  chance  of  reception  ;  and  for  thirty  years  after 
their  death,  their  personal  friends,  who  had  heard 
them  speak  of  their  intercourse  with  John,  would 
have  raised  a  great  controversy  if  they  had  been 
asked  to  receive  as  John's  a  Gospel  of  which  the 
men  who  had  listened  to  John  himself  had  never 
heard,  and  which  contained  a  different  account  of 
our  Lord  from  that  which  John  had  given.  But 
within  thirty  years  after  the  martyrdom  of  Pol}xarp 
our  Fourth  Gospel  was  universally  regarded  by  the 
Church  as  having  a  place  among  the  Christian  Scrip- 
tures, and  as  the  work  of  the  Apostle  John.  The  con- 
clusion seems  irresistible  ;  John  must  have  written  it. 

IV. 

From  the  Fourth  Gospel  let  us  pass  to  the  other 
three.  Five  and  thirty  }'ears  before  a.d.  185,  we 
learn  from  Justin  Martyr  that  when  Christian 
Churches  met  for  worship  it  was  their  regular 
custom  to  read  certain  narratives  of  our  Lord's  life, 
which  he  calls  Memoirs,  iMonoirs  of  the  Apostles, 
Memoirs  draivn  up  by  the  Apostles  and  those  loho 
folloivcd  them,  Memoirs  composed  by  them  [the  apo- 
stles], which  are  called  Gospels."  The  description  of 
these  writings  corresponds  accurately  to  our  Four 
Gospels,  which  are  memoirs,  recollections,  not  regular 
biographies,  and  which  are  attributed  to  Matthew  and 
John,  who  were  apostles,  and  to  Mark  and  Luke, 
who   were    followers  of    the    apostles.       In    Justin's 


PEVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  2S7 

works  there  arc  no  less  than  200  passages  in  which 
he  either  quotes  words  which  are  found  in  our 
Gospels,  or  refers  to  facts  which  our  Gospels  record. 
The  quotations,  indeed,  are,  for  the  most  part,  in- 
exact ;  but  they  are  such  quotations  as  a  man  might 
make  from  memory.  The  story  of  our  Lord  which 
can  be  compiled  from  Justin's  works  is  the  same 
story  as  that  which  is  given  in  the  Gospels  which 
are  now  universally  received  by  the  Church.  There 
are  a  few — a  very  few — statements  about  our  Lord 
in  Justin  which  arc  not  contained  in  any  of  our 
Gospels  ;  as  he  must  have  known  many  men  who 
had  known  the  apostles,  these  statements  may  have 
come  to  him  from  tradition  ;  the  wonder  is  that  they 
are  not  more  numerous.  Further,  from  Justin's 
quotations,  every  one  of  our  Four  Gospels  receives 
support.  It  seems  reasonable  to  infer  that  Justin's 
Gospels  were  the  same  as  our  own. 

There  is  one  consideration  which  makes  this  infer- 
ence certain.  It  is  not  conceivable  that  in  A.D.  185 
our  Four  Gospels  would  have  been  regarded  with 
religious  reverence,  and  would  have  been  attributed 
to  apostles,  if  they  had  appeared  within  the  previous 
five  and  thirty  years.  Living  men  would  have  clearly 
remembered  when  they  were  first  published,  and 
when  they  were  first  introduced  into  the  services  of 
the  Church.  In  A.D.  150 — ^just  five  and  thirty  years 
before  A.D.  185 — Justin's  Meiuoirs,  which  he  also 
calls  Gospels,  were  being  read  to  Christian  men  and 
women  every  week  when  they  met  for  worship.     By 


2S8  REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

what  miracle  did  they  suddenly  drop  out  of  use,  and 
drop  out  of  use  everywhere?  By  what  miracle  did 
new  Gospels  immediately  succeed  to  their  authority, 
and  succeed  to  it  everywhere  ?  By  what  miracle  did 
all  the  copies  of  the  old  Gospels  suddenly  perish,  so 
that  learned  men  like  Irena^us  had  no  suspicion  that 
they  had  ever  existed,  and  imagined  tiiat  the  new 
Gospels  had  been  in  existence  from  the  beginning? 
Cliurches,  like  nations  and  individuals,  are  slow  to 
change  their  customs.  It  takes  time  in  our  days  to 
induce  a  single  group  of  Churches,  if  they  are  not 
under  a  strong  central  ecclesiastical  authority,  to 
change  their  hymn-book ;  in  the  second  century 
there  was  no  strong  central  ecclesiastical  authority, 
and  the  great  Churches  stood  on  their  traditions ; 
and  yet  we  are  asked  to  suppose  that  between  A.D. 
150  and  A.D.  185  they  all  changed  their  Gospels 
And  to  increase  the  wonder,  they  believed  that  the 
Gospels  which  they  surrendered  were  written  by 
apostles  and  followers  of  the  apostles.  It  is  incre- 
dible. The  Gospels  which  were  read  in  the  Christian 
assemblies  in  Justin's  time  were  the  Gospels  which  a 
few  years  later  were  "welded  together"  by  Justin's 
friend  Tatian  in  his  Haj'inony,  and  a  few  years  later 
still  were  described  by  Irena^us  in  terms  which  show 
that  during  his  memory  they  had  always  been 
regarded  with  reverence  by  the  Church.  Justin's 
Gospels  were  the  Gospels  of  Irenasus  ;  the  Gospels 
of  Irenreus  are  ours.  The  Alcnioirs  of  the  Apostles, 
the   Gospels  which  were  read  in  the  services  of  the 


RE  VIE  IV   OF  THE  ARGUAJENT.  2S9 

Church  in  A.D.  150,  were  the  same  Gospels  that  are 
read  in  the  services  of  the  Church  every  Sunday  in 
England. 

At  that  time,  in  A.D.  150,  Polycarp  was  still  living. 
He  and  the  surviving  friends  of  the  Apostle  John 
would,  as  I  have  argued  already,  have  prevented  the 
Church,  during  the  first  half  of  the  second  century, 
from  accepting  any  Gospel  as  John's  which  John 
had  not  written.  But  he  and  they  would  also  have 
prevented  the  Church,  during  the  first  half  of  the 
second  century,  from  accepting  any  other  Gospels 
as  authentic  which  contained  a  story  of  Christ  dif- 
ferent from  that  which  the  original  apostles  had  told. 
That  during  their  lifetime  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke 
were  received  as  genuine  and  authentic  is  a  proof 
that  the  narrative  contained  in  these  three  evangelists 
was,  in  substance,  identical  with  that  account  of  our 
Lord's  life  which  they  had  heard  from  the  beginning. 

V 

But  we  have  a  definite  witness  to  Matthew  and  Mark 
in  the  person  of  Papias  of  Hierapolis,  who  had  known 
friends  of  Andrew,  and  Peter,  and  Philip,  and  Thomas, 
and  James,  and  John,  and  Matthew  ;  who  had  known 
the  daughters  of  Philip,  for  they  were  members  of  the 
Church  of  Hierapolis,  of  which  he  was  bishop ;  and 
who  had  known  two  men  who  were  immediate  dis- 
ciples of  Christ.  Papias  had  been  anxious  to  learn 
about  the  discourses  of  the  apostles  from  the  men 
who  had  listened  to  them  and  had  been  their  disciples, 

L.a  19 


290  REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

From  tlic  daughters  of  Philip  he  learned  what  their 
father  had  been  accustomed  to  say  about  our  Lord. 
From  Aristion  and  "the  Elder  John"  he  learned  what 
men  who  had  known  Christ  Himself  had  to  tell  him 
about  our  Lord's  miracles  and  teaching.  He  used 
what  he  learned  from  them  in  his  book,  entitled  an 
Exposition  of  Oracles  of  the  Lord,  or  Dominical  Oracles, 
which  in  modern  language  was  an  Exposition  of  CJiris- 
tian  Oracles  or  Christian  Scriptures ;  and,  apparently, 
of  the  Gospels.  On  the  authority  of  what  had  been 
told  him  by  these  persons,  he  says  that  Matthew's 
Gospel  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew,  and  that 
Mark's  Gospel  consists  of  Mark's  recollections  of  the 
discourses  of  Peter.  In  the  brief  passages  of  Papias 
which  have  come  down  to  us,  he  says  nothing 
about  the  third  Gospel  or  the  Fourth  ;  he  may  have 
said  nothing  about  them  which  was  not  universally 
known  to  the  Church  in  the  time  of  Euscbius,  and 
therefore,  whatever  he  said,  Eusebius  does  not  record  it. 
I  think  it  extremely  improbable  that  such  persons 
as  these, — the  daughters  of  Philip,  and  men  who  had 
known  the  apostles,  and  two  men  who  were  the  imme- 
diate disciples  of  our  Lord, — would  have  believed 
that  the  first  Gospel  was  written  by  Matthew,  if 
Matthew  had  not  written  it,  or  that  the  second  Gospel 
was  written  by  Mark,  if  Mark  had  not  written  it ;  and 
I  think  it  equally  improbable  that  Papias  would  have 
recorded  the  statements  of  any  particular  individuals 
among  them  concerning  the  authorship  of  these 
Gospels,  unless  their  statements  had  been  supported 


REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  291 

by  the  general  consent  of  the  rest.  But  though  the 
testimony  to  the  authorship  of  Matthew  and  Mark  is 
in  my  judgment  strong  and  sufficient,  I  am  willing 
to  admit  that  it  is  not  absolutely  decisive  ;  there  are 
some  kinds  of  facts  on  which  tradition,  unsustained  by 
other  evidence,  is  liable  to  error.  It  is  possible  that 
Matthew  did  not  originally  write  his  Gospel  in  Hebrew, 
though  his  friends,  twenty  or  thirty  years  after  his 
death,  thought  that  he  did.  It  is  even  possible  that  it 
was  not  Mark,  but  some  other  friend  of  Peter,  that 
composed  a  Gospel  from  his  recollections  of  Peter's 
discourses.  But  that  such  persons  as  those  whom 
Papias  consulted  accepted  Matthew's  Gospel  and 
Mark's  Gospel  as  authentic  is,  for  me,  a  decisive 
proof  that  these  Gospels  contain,  in  substance,  the 
very  story  which  had  been  told  by  the  original 
apostles.  They  had  heard  the  apostles  ;  they  had 
the  books  ;  and  they  believed  that  Matthew,  one  of 
the  apostles,  wrote  the  first  Gospel,  and  that  Mark, 
the  friend  of  another,  wrote  the  second. 

"Yes;  but  can  we  be  quite  certain  that  the 
Matthew  and  INIark  of  Papias  were  our  Matthew  and 
Mark?"  We  can.  Papias  published  his  Exposition 
flf  Oj'acles  of  the  Lord  cihowi  A.D.  135  ;  and  it  is  from 
this  book — probably  from  an  introductory  letter 
which  served  as  its  preface — that  the  passages  of  his 
which  I  have  quoted  arc  taken.  He  was  writing 
about  Gospels  which  were  at  that  time  in  common 
use,  not  about  Gospels  which  had  been  superseded 
by  other  documents  which  gave  a  different  account  of 


292  REVIEW  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

our  Lord.  The  Matthew  and  Mark  of  A.D.  135  were 
therefore  the  Matthew  and  Mark  which  had  been 
received  as  trustworthy  by  men  who  had  known 
several  apostles,  by  the  daughters  of  Philip,  by  two 
men  who  had  known  Christ.  Fifteen  years  later,  in 
A.D.  150,  our  Gospels  were  being  read  week  after 
week  when  Christians  met  for  worship.  In  that  brief 
interval  there  was  no  time  for  the  original  Gospels  to 
pass  out  of  existence  and  for  new  Gospels  to  take 
their  place.  The  ground  is  solid  and  firm  ;  our 
Gospels  were  the  Gospels  of  Irenaeus  ;  the  Gospels  of 
Irenaeus  were  the  Gospels  of  Justin  ;  Justin's  Gospels 
were  the  Gospels  of  Papias.  If  Papias's  Gospels  con- 
tained a  trustworthy  story  of  our  Lord,  so  do  ours. 

VI. 

In  the  later  Lectures  of  this  course  I  endeavoured 
to  show  that  the  Four  Gospels  are  historically 
trustworthy.  But  I  end  as  I  began.  An  assurance 
resting  on  historical  and  literary  proofs  that  our 
Four  Gospels  contain  the  very  account  of  our  Lord's 
miracles  and  teaching  that  was  given  by  the  apostles, 
and  that  they  were  written  by  apostles  and  their 
"followers,"  is  not  the  foundation  of  our  faith  in 
Christ.  The  Gospels  themselves  are  not  necessary  to 
Dur  faith.  There  were  tribes  in  the  second  century 
who,  as  Irenaeus  tells  us,  had  believed  in  Christ,  but 
did  not  possess  the  Christian  Scriptures.  And  there 
are  many  men  living  in  our  own  time  who  could  say 
that,  after  their  traditional  confidence  in  the  genuine- 


RE  VIE  IV    OF   7 HE  ARGUMENT.  293 

ness  and  authenticity  of  the  Four  Gospels  had  been 
broken  up,  and  while  their  judgment  as  to  the  age  in 
which  the  Gospels  were  written  was  still  in  suspense, 
their  personal  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  un- 
shaken. For  a  time  mists  and  clouds  were  resting 
heavily  on  His  earthly  ministry;  they  were  not  certain 
that  they  knew  exactly  what  He  had  said  and  done 
during  those  brief  years  in  which  He,  the  Son  of  the 
Eternal,  was  revealing  His  grace  and  power  under  the 
limitations  of  this  earthly  life.  But  they  were  as  certain 
as  ever  of  the  transcendent  works  which  He  had  been 
doing  during  the  eighteen  hundred  years  since  He 
returned  to  His  glory,  and  which  He  was  doinj^  still. 
They  knew  that,  through  age  after  age  and  in  many 
lands,  He  had  released  men  from  the  sense  of  guilt, 
had  enabled  them,  in  the  power  of  His  own  life,  to 
live  righteously,  and  that  through  Him  a  great  mul- 
titude had  found  God.  These  great  things  which 
Christ  had  done  for  others  He  had  done  for  them. 
The  books  which  told  the  story  of  the  earthly  Christ, 
— about  these  they  were  not  sure  ;  about  Christ  Him- 
self they  were  always  sure ;  and  they  trusted,  loved, 
and  served  Him  still. 

The  loss — the  temporary  loss — of  certainty  about 
our  Lord's  earthly  history  was  a  grave  loss  ;  but  it 
was  not  without  its  compensations.  For  a  time  the 
Christ  of  Jerusalem  and  Galilee  was  hidden  by  storm- 
clouds  of  controversy,  and  their  hearts  were  sore  that 
they  could  see  and  hear  Him  no  longer.  But  they 
climbed   the   blessed    heights   which    rise   above   all 


294  RE  VIE  ^V  OF  THE    ARGUMENT. 


storms,  and  they  learned  to  live  in  the  immediate 
presence  of  the  Christ  who  has  passed  into  the  eternal 
light  of  God,  and  yet  is  not  beyond  the  reach  of  the 
most  perplexed  and  most  troubled  of  the  sons  of  men. 
When  they  recovered  the  Christ  of  the  Gospels,  they 
saw  Him  transfigured  and  glorified. 

For  Christian  faith  it  is  enough  to  know  the  Living 
Christ ;  a  knowledge  of  Christ  "  after  the  flesh  " — in 
His  place  in  the  visible  and  earthly  order — is  not 
indispensable.  But  for  the  perfect  strength  and  joy  of 
the  Christian  life  we  must  know  both  the  Christ  who 
lived  and  died  in  the  Holy  Land  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago,  and  the  Christ  who,  ever  since  His  resur- 
rection, has  been  saving  and  ruling  men.  To  deepen 
your  faith  in  the  Living  Christ,  and  to  strengthen 
your  confidence  in  the  historical  trustworthiness  of 
the  story  of  His  earthly  ministry  contained  in  the 
Four  Gospels,  has  been  the  object  of  this  course  of 
Lectures.  They  were  begun  when  the  frosts  and  the 
dark  days  of  winter  were  with  us  ;  now  that  they  are 
closing  we  have  come  to  the  heat  and  splendour  of 
glorious  summer.  It  may  be — God  grant  it ! — that 
this  is  a  parable,  and  that  while  we  have  been  pur- 
suing these  inquiries  together,  some  of  you  have 
passed  from  wintry  days  of  doubt  into  the  clear  light 
of  a  happy  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 


APPENDIX, 

Note  A  (p,  109). 

EusEBius  finished  his  History  shortly  before  the  meeting  of 
the  Council  of  Nicaea.  At  that  council,  and  during  the  fierce 
excitements  of  the  Arian  controversy  which  preceded  it,  the 
authority  of  the  sacred  books  of  the  Church  was  regarded  as 
final.  Arius  was  condemned  by  an  Egyptian  synod  on  "  the 
testimony  of  the  Divine  Scriptures."  On  the  other  hand,  Arius 
himself,  when  sending  a  copy  of  his  creed  to  the  emperor,  adds, 
"  This  is  the  faith  which  we  have  received  from  the  holy  Gos- 
pels, according  to  the  Lord's  words,  as  the  catholic  Church  and 
the  Scriptures  teach,  which  we  believe  in  all  things."  But 
the  council,  though  it  defined  some  of  the  greatest  mysteries 
of  the  eternal  life  of  God,  did  not  attempt  to  declare  what 
books  should  be  regarded  as  forming  the  canon  of  the  New 
Testament. 

Seventy  years  later,  however,  the  third  Council  of  Carthage 
(a.D.  397)  determined  "  that  besides  the  canonical  Scriptures 
nothing  be  read  in  the  Church  under  the  title  of  Divine  Scrip- 
tures." A  list  of  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament 
is  given  which  contains  some  books  that  we  regard  as  apocry- 
phal ;  the  list  of  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  precisely  the  same  as  our  own. 

But  the  decrees  of  a  provincial  Council  in  Africa  could  not 
control  the  judgment  of  scholars  and  Churches  in  other  coun- 
tries. Throughout  the  West,  our  present  canon,  largely  per- 
haps through  the  influence  of  Jerome  and  Augustine,  was 
accepted  from  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century.  In  Asia 
Minor,     Gregory    Nazianzenus,    who   died    A.D.    3S9,   did   not 

29s 


296  APPENDIX. 


acknowledge  the  Apocalypse.  In  Syria  several  of  the  disputed 
books  were  regarded  with  doubt  as  late  as  the  sixth  century, 
perhaps  later. 

The  Apocalypse  was  placed  among  the  disputed  writings 
by  Nicephorus  of  Constantinople,  in  the  ninth  century.  It  is 
curious  that  the  Apocalypse,  which  was  one  of  the  seven  books 
about  whose  apostolic  authorship  there  was  serious  doubt  in 
early  centuries,  is  one  of  the  five  books  about  whose  apostoHc 
authorship  the  most  recent  school  of  destructive  criticism  is 
most  certain.  But  gradually  all  the  seven  secured  their  place 
side  by  side  with  the  books  that  were  universally  received  as 
canonical. 

The  controversy  was  re-opened  at  the  Reformation.  Luther 
treated  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Epistle  of  James,  and 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse  with  great  freedom. 
Calvin  in  his  histitutes  (book  i.,  cap.  vii.)  declares  it  to  be 
*'  a  most  pernicious  error  "  that  "  the  Scriptures  have  only  so 
much  weight  as  is  conceded  to  them  by  the  suffrages  of  the 
Church  ;  as  though  the  eternal  and  inviolable  truth  of  God 
depended  on  the  arbitrary  will  of  men."  He  thinks  that  those 
who  maintain  that  it  depends  on  the  determination  of  the 
Church  what  books  are  to  be  comprised  in  the  canon  show 
"great  contempt  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  He  beheves  that  faith 
in  the  Divine  origin  of  Holy  Scripture  comes  from  "the  secret 
testimony  of  the  Spirit."  For  as  "  God  alone  is  a  sufficient 
witness  of  Himself  in  His  own  word,  so  also  the  word  will  never 
gain  credit  in  the  hearts  of  men  till  it  be  confirmed  by  the 
internal  testimony  of  the  Spirit."  For  Calvin,  the  universal 
consent  of  the  Church  in  the  recognised  canon  did  not  close 
the  controversy  about  the  disputed  books.  He  judged  them, 
one  by  one,  and  judged  them  by  their  contents.'  At  the  Council 
of  Trent,  "  for  the  first  time,"  says  Professor  Westcott,  "  the 
question  of  the  contents  of  the  Bible  "—that  is,  the  question  what 

1  "With  regard  to  the  Antilegomcna  of  the  New  Testament,  Calvin 
expresses  himself  with  hardly  less  boldness  than  Luther,  though  practi- 
cally the  followed  common  usage.  He  passes  over  2  and  3  John  and  the 
Apocalypse  in  his  commentary  without  notice.  — Westcott  :  History  of 
the  Canon,  p.  488. 


APPENDIX.  297 


books  are  to  be  included  in  the  Bible — "  was  made  an  absolute 
article  of  faith,  and  confirmed  by  an  anathema."  '  The  council 
set  out  a  list  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
including  Tobit,  yiidith,  Wisdom.,  Ecclesiasticits,  i  and  2 
Maccabees.,  and  passed  this  decree,  "  If  however  any  one  does 
not  receive  the  entire  books  with  all  their  parts  as  they  are 
accustomed  to  be  read  in  the  catholic  Church  ...  as  sacred 
and  canonical,     ...     let  him  be  anathema." 

For  those  who  inherit  the  true  Protestant  tradition,  the 
question,  What  books  are  to  be  included  in  the  canon  of  either 
the  Old  Testament  or  the  New  ?  is  not  one  which  can  be  finally 
determined  by  Church  authority. 


Note  B  (p.  135). 
An  attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  destroy  the  force  of  the  kind 
of  evidence  alleged  in  these  lectures  for  the  trustworthiness 
of  the  story  of  the  Four  Gospels,  by  suggesting  that  similar 
evidence  may  be  alleged  on  behalf  of  the  canonicity  and 
inspiration  of  the  curious  book  called  The  Shepherd,  and  bear- 
ing the  name  of  Hermas.  At  what  date  this  book  was  written 
is  uncertain  ;  but  it  probably  belongs  to  the  middle  of  the 
second  century.  It  is  a  collection  of  visions,  parables,  and 
precepts. 

The  following  are  the  main  points  to  be  considered  in  com- 
paring the  "testimony"  to  Hennas  with  the  "  testimony"  to  our 
Gospels,  {a)  We  learn  from  Eusebius  that  it  had  been  read  in 
churches,  and  was  quoted  by  some  ancient  writers,  but  that  it 
"  had  been  spoken  against  by  some,"  and  therefore  "  could  have 
no  place  among  the  acknowledged  books."  {b)  The  unknown 
writer  of  the  Miiratorian  Canon,  which  belongs  to  the  latter 
half  of  the  second  century  (perhaps  about  a.d.  170),  says  that 
"Hermas  composed  The  Shcphad very  lately  in  our  times,  in 
the  city  of  Rome,  while  the  Bishop  Pius,  his  brother,  occupied 
the  chair  of  the  Roman  Church.  And  therefore  it  should  be 
read,  but  it  can  never  be  publicly  used  in  the  church  either 


1  Wkstcott  :  History  of  the  Canon,  p.  477. 


20 


298  APPENDIX. 


among  the  prophets  or  the  apostles."  {c)  Irenaeus  quotes  it 
once,  but  without  naming  the  author ;  and  quotes  it  in  a  way 
which  probably,  but  not  certainly,  implies  that  he  thought  it  an 
inspired  writing,  {d)  Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  it  several 
times  as  an  inspired  writing,  {e)  Origen  quotes  it  several  times 
as  having  the  authority  of  Scripture  ;  and  he  is  the  first  writer 
that  attributes  it  to  Hernias,  the  friend  of  Paul.  But  this 
theory  of  the  authorship  is  given  as  being  nothing  more  than 
his  own  private  opinion.  "I  think,"  he  says,  "that  that  Hermas 
is  the  writer  of  that  book  which  is  called  The  Shepherd,  which 
writing  seems  to  me  very  useful  and,  as  1  think,  divinely 
inspired."  But  he  also  says  that  it  is  despised  by  some.  (/) 
Tertullian  strongly  condemns  it,  and  declares  that  every  council 
of  the  catholic  or  orthodox  Church  judged  it  to  be  apocryphal 
or  spurious. 

It  appears  from  these  passages  that  some  Churches  read  Tlie 
Shepherd  for  a  time  in  their  public  services,  but  this  did 
not  necessarily  imply  the  recognition  of  its  inspiration.  Some 
Churches  might  think  that  Bunyan's  PilgriiiCs  Progress  is 
sufficiently  edifying  to  justify  its  being  read  occasionally  in  the 
course  of  public  service,  without  attributing  to  it  the  authority 
of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  Some  persons  thought 
it  an  inspired  book.  But  Tertullian  strongly  denied  its  inspira- 
tion, and  maintained  that  it  was  generally  regarded  as  spurious. 
Origen  advanced  the  theory  of  its  inspiration,  and  attributed  it 
to  the  friend  of  Paul  as  a  private  opinion  of  his  own.  Evidence 
of  this  kind  is  wholly  different  from  that  which  is  advanced 
in  the  lectures  for  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the  Four 
Gospels  ;  the  evidence  is  conflicting  ;  it  consists  largely  in  the 
opinions  of  particular  individuals  ;  so  far  as  the  evidence  is 
derived  from  its  use  in  the  public  services  of  the  Church,  the 
use  was  partial. 

Further.  The  testimony  of  both  individuals  and  Churches 
in  favour  of  the  inspiration  of  a  book  of  edification  is  wholly 
different  from  their  testimony  that  the  Four  Gospels  contain  the 
story  of  Christ  which  had  been  always  received  in  the  Christian 
Church.  The  testimony  to  the  inspiration  oi  Hennas  rested  on 
the  judjfmen/  of  those  who  believed  it  to  be  inspired  :  the  testi- 


APPENDIX.  299 


mony  to  the  Gospels,  as  containing  the  story  of  Christ  which 
had  been  told  by  apostles,  rested  on  a  continuous  and  unbroken 
tradition.  The  one  was  a  question  of  opinion  ;  the  other  was  a 
question  of  fact. 


Butler  &  Tanner,  Tlie  Sclwood  Printing  Works,  Fromc,  and  London. 


I 


Date  Ehie 

-  's  "4^ 

^ 

^^sjfifSIPIff^BN 

P 

f) 

BS2555.8.D13  1890 

The  living  Christ  and  the  four  Gospels 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00059  3634 


